Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147 (1959), was a U.S. Supreme Court case upholding the freedom of the press.The decision deemed unconstitutional a city ordinance that made one in possession of obscene books criminally liable because it did not require proof that one had knowledge of the book's content, and thus violated the freedom of the press guaranteed in the First Amendment. [1]
Lange v. California, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the exigent circumstances requirement related to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court ruled unanimously that the warrantless entry into a home by police in pursuit of a misdemeanant is not unequivocally justified.
Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), [1] is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
For the first time in decades, the California Supreme Court has taken a citizen initiative off the ballot before voters could weigh in. Justices on the state’s highest court unanimously ruled ...
Fernandez v. California, 571 U.S. 292 (2014), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that explored the limits of Georgia v. Randolph, a 2006 case that held that consent to search a dwelling is invalid in the presence of an objecting co-resident. [1]
(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear a challenge by Uber and Lyft to lawsuits by the state of California on behalf of drivers who signed agreements to keep legal disputes ...
In a 7–2 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that California's blanket primary violated a political party's First Amendment right of association. For the majority, Justice Scalia wrote that "Proposition 198 forces political parties to associate with—to have their nominees, and hence their positions, determined by ...
A lower court ruling in 2021 had said the measure was illegal, but an appeals court reversed that decision last year. The California Supreme Court’s decision means companies like Uber and Lyft ...