Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Fischer v. United States, 603 U.S. ___, was a United States Supreme Court case about the proper use of the felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding, established in the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, against participants in the January 6 United States Capitol attack. The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in June of 2024 that the charge only applied ...
Fischer v United States, 529 U.S. 667 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case that ruled that the scope of the federal bribery statute 18 U.S.C. § 666(b), which applied to organizations that received "benefits in excess of $10,000 under a Federal program", included funds received through Medicare.
The Oyez Project is an unofficial online multimedia archive website for the Supreme Court of the United States. It was initiated by the Illinois Institute of Technology 's Chicago-Kent College of Law and now also sponsored by Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute and Justia .
The Supreme Court of the United States handed down nineteen per curiam opinions during its 2009 term, which began on October 5, 2009, and concluded October 3, 2010. [ 1 ] Because per curiam decisions are issued from the Court as an institution, these opinions all lack the attribution of authorship or joining votes to specific justices.
Jeffrey L. Fisher (born 1970) [2] is an American law professor and U.S. Supreme Court litigator who has argued forty-three cases and worked on dozens of others before the Supreme Court. He is co-director of the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.
In September 2011, lawyers representing Fisher filed petition seeking review from the Supreme Court. [13] [17] On February 21, 2012, the court granted certiorari in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. The Supreme Court heard the oral argument in October 2012, and handed down its decision on June 24, 2013.
Case history; Prior: 278 A.D. 253, 104 N.Y.S.2d 740 (App. Div. 1951), affirmed, 303 N.Y. 242, 101 N.E.2d 665 (1951).Holding; Provisions of the New York Education Law that allow a censor to forbid the commercial showing of any non-licensed motion picture film, or revoke or deny the license of a film deemed to be "sacrilegious", were a "restraint on freedom of speech", and thereby a violation of ...
It specifically targets two activities: filming movies in a movie theater, and early release of movies and software before they become publicly available. It permits preregistration of certain types of unpublished works if it determines that such works have a history of infringement prior to commercial distribution.