Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849) Established the political question doctrine in controversies arising under the Guarantee Clause of Article Four of the United States Constitution. Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918) The Selective Service Act of 1917 and, more generally, conscription do not violate the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition of ...
Held that a New York resident (whose state had women's suffrage) lacked any particularized standing to challenge alleged state-level of the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This was a landmark case, prior to this, private citizens were permitted to litigate public rights. 9–0 Frothingham v. Mellon: 1923
Landmark court decisions, in present-day common law legal systems, establish precedents that determine a significant new legal principle or concept, or otherwise substantially affect the interpretation of existing law. "Leading case" is commonly used in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth jurisdictions instead of "landmark case", as used ...
These lists are sorted chronologically by chief justice and include most major cases decided by the court. Jay, Rutledge, and Ellsworth Courts (October 19, 1789 – December 15, 1800) Marshall Court (February 4, 1801 – July 6, 1835)
The United States Constitution contains several provisions regarding criminal procedure, including: Article Three, along with Amendments Five, Six, Eight, and Fourteen. Such cases have come to comprise a substantial portion of the Supreme Court's docket.
Cases that consider the First Amendment implications of payments mandated by the state going to use in part for speech by third parties Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) Communications Workers of America v. Beck (1978) Chicago Local Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986) Keller v. State Bar of California (1990) Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass'n ...
This week, the Supreme Court listened to hours of oral arguments in two landmark cases – Reynaldo Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh – where several families are suing the social media ...
Instead of trying to justify the right to marital privacy under substantive due process, the Court said that the marital relationship is one "lying within the zone of privacy governed by several fundamental constitutional guarantees" and the opinion discusses various landmark cases where specific parts of the bill of rights have been held to ...