Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Cal NAGPRA (Assembly Bill (978)) was an act created by the state of California which was signed into law in 2001. The act was created to implement the same repatriation expectations for state-funded institutions, museums, repositories, or collections as those federally supported through NAGPRA. Cal NAGPRA also supports non-federally recognized ...
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. 1 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held by a 5–4 vote that a 2017 U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) order to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration program was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and ...
The Mexican Repatriation was the repatriation, deportation, and expulsion of Mexicans and Mexican Americans from the United States during the Great Depression between 1929 and 1939. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] Estimates of how many were repatriated, deported, or expelled range from 300,000 to 2 million (of which 40–60% were citizens of the United ...
Wana the Bear v. Community Construction (1982) was a court case decision by the California Court of Appeals that upheld the non-protected status of Native American burial grounds. The decision effectively allowed for the continued mass desecration of Native American burial sites, including looting, since they were not legally protected as ...
Tens of thousands of California residents will decide whether to permanently relocate or rebuild their homes after the most destructive fires in Los Angeles’ history.
Moore v. United States, 602 U.S. 572 (2024), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the ability of the federal government to tax unrealized gains as income. The Supreme Court upheld the Mandatory Repatriation Tax (MRT).
Peruta v. San Diego, 824 F.3d 919 (9th Cir. 2016), was a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pertaining to the legality of San Diego County's restrictive policy regarding requiring documentation of "good cause" that "distinguish[es] the applicant from the mainstream and places the applicant in harm's way" (Cal. Pen. Code §§ 26150, 26155) before issuing a ...
Case history; Prior: Roe v. Anderson, 966 F. Supp. 977 (E.D. Cal. 1997); affirmed, 134 F.3d 1400 (9th Cir. 1998); cert. granted, 524 U.S. 982 (1998).: Holding; California statute limiting new residents' benefits for the first year they live in the state is an unconstitutional discrimination and violation of their right to travel.