Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
With the Supreme Court holding such importance in the American legal and political system, researchers, scholars, and court-watchers have long tried to understand the motivations of its justices. There are three main models of Judicial decision making: the legal model, the attitudinal model, and the strategic model.
Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, 588 U.S. 684 (2019) is a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court concerning partisan gerrymandering. [1] The Court ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles", the federal courts cannot review such allegations, as they present nonjusticiable political questions outside the jurisdiction of these courts.
Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (1976), was a landmark case by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that private schools that discriminate on the basis of race or establish racial segregation are in violation of federal law. [1]
United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that allowed the United States Border Patrol to set up permanent or fixed checkpoints on public highways leading to or away from the Mexican border and that the checkpoints are not a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Ann Hopkins resigned from the accounting firm when she was rejected for partnership for the second year and sued Price Waterhouse for violating her rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Both the district court and the federal circuit court of appeals ruled in Hopkins's favor, but courts disagreed about the level of proof ...
Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001), was a Supreme Court of the United States decision that a regulation enacted under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [1] did not include a private right of action to allow private lawsuits based on evidence of disparate impact. [2]
The Supreme Court earlier this month tossed out an appeal from anti-abortion doctors challenging expanded access to the abortion pill mifepristone. In March, it ruled that states couldn’t yank ...
Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the line-item veto, as granted in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, violated the Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution because it impermissibly gave the President of the United States the power to unilaterally amend or repeal ...