Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476 (1965), is a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It stated in clear terms that, pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment rules regarding search and seizure applied to state governments. [1] While this principle had been outlined in other cases, such as Mapp v.
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) filed a lawsuit Friday against Travis County over its voter registration policies, making it the third Democratic-leaning area in the state ...
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006), is a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court ruled that only District 23 of the 2003 Texas redistricting violated the Voting Rights Act. [1]
United States v. Grubbs, 547 U.S. 90 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the constitutionality of "anticipatory" search warrants under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Jeff Trevillion told the Statesman that he believes the Travis County Commissioners Court will wait for a staff report on county jail facilities before deciding how it can ...
The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas and a New York-based law firm have sued Travis County for failing to provide lawyers at bail hearings, arguing that the county has violated arrestees ...
At the time, First Assistant Attorney General of Texas Brent Webster decried Mangrum's decision as "an activist Austin judge’s attempt to override Texas abortion laws." [8] [10] On November 28, 2023, the Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Zurawski. By this time, the number of plaintiffs in the case had increased to 22: 20 women ...
For example, Potter County—less than one-tenth of Travis County’s size—was projected to save over $1 million by lowering the number of jail days by 5.6 days per person on average.