Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
“Despite Act 10 being upheld repeatedly by state and federal courts, an activist Dane County judge decided to issue a ruling suddenly deciding Wisconsin's law is unconstitutional. We will appeal ...
“This lawsuit came more than a decade after Act 10 became law and after many courts rejected the same meritless legal challenges," Vos said. "Act 10 has saved Wisconsin taxpayers more than $16 ...
2011 Wisconsin Act 10, also known as the Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill or the Wisconsin Budget Adjustment Act, [1] [2] is a controversial law enacted by the 100th Wisconsin Legislature which significantly limited the rights and compensation of state and local government employees in Wisconsin.
Despite Act 10 being upheld repeatedly by state and federal courts, an activist Dane County judge decided to issue a ruling suddenly deciding Wisconsin's law is unconstitutional," LeMahieu said in ...
Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), is a landmark decision [1] of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices; and subsection (b) of Section 4 ...
The Court's decision, by Justice Sutherland, was that previous decisions (Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908) and Bunting v. Oregon, 243 U.S. 426 (1917)) did not overrule the holding in Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905), which protected freedom of contract. The previous decisions, he noted, addressed maximum hours.
Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. [1] The case reached the high court after U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, appealed a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in favor of LeRoy Carhart that struck down the Act.
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that established the principle of judicial review, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws and statutes they find to violate the Constitution of the United States.