Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States, citing a constitutional right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children, struck down a Washington law that allowed any third party to petition state courts for child visitation rights over parental objections.
The Supreme Court has set a new precedent in custody law due to a local case in which a mother said she was denied due process. Ohio’s highest court says parent’s rights were not violated in ...
Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, 593 U.S. 522 (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania violated First Amendment rights of a Catholic foster care agency by refusing to renew the agency's contract unless it agreed to certify married same-sex couples as foster parents.
The full court, on rehearing the case en banc, held that parts of the law, that set federal standards for lower and state courts, were constitutional, but that the parts of the law that required state agencies to perform certain acts were unconstitutional as a violation of the Tenth Amendment.
The appeals court judges also wrote that a remedial order by U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves, which sought to make changes in Mississippi's mental health system, "vastly exceeds the scope o
The ADF defended Elane Photography in its appeal of being found in violation of the New Mexico Human Rights Act for refusing to photograph a 2006 civil commitment ceremony. In August 2013 the New Mexico Supreme Court found in favor of Willock and that the photographer was in violation of the act. [20] [21] [22]
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Thursday that an order barring an anti-abortion protester from coming close to a Planned Parenthood nurse violated his First Amendment free speech rights and must ...
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.