Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States v. Alvarez , 567 U.S. 709 (2012), is a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 was unconstitutional. The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 was a federal law that criminalized false statements about having a military medal.
On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court found the law unconstitutional in a 6 to 3 decision, with Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito dissenting. [30] [31] In United States v. Alvarez the majority held that the Stolen Valor Act was an unconstitutional abridgment of the freedom of speech under the First Amendment. [30] [31]
This category is for case law of the United States in the year ... Tetris Holding, LLC v. Xio Interactive, Inc. ... Chimento; U. United States v. Alvarez; United ...
Laws applied Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez , 546 U.S. 21 (2005), is a US labor law case of the a United States Supreme Court , interpreting the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938, as amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947.
Office of the United States Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006, LLC, 602 U.S. ___ (2024), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that prospective parity is the appropriate remedy for the short-lived and small disparity created by the fee statute held unconstitutional in Siegel v.
On Monday, April 21, 1986 the United States Supreme Court overruled the state court in a 5–4 decision written by Sandra Day O'Connor.They held that libel plaintiffs must shoulder the burden of proving falsity, when the article in question relates to public concern.
303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. 570 (2023), is a United States Supreme Court decision that dealt with the intersection of anti-discrimination law in public accommodations with the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In a 6–3 decision, the Court found for a website designer, ruling that the state ...
BedRoc Limited, LLC v. United States, 541 U.S. 176 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided sand and gravel are not "valuable minerals" reserved to the United States Government under the Pittman Underground Water Act of 1919.