Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Buck v.Bell, the United States Supreme Court ruled in a majority opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. that a state statute that authorized compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In the related case of Sun Oil Co. v. Wortman, 486 U.S. 717 (1988), the Court refused to apply this rule when Kansas had chosen to apply its own statute of limitations to causes raised by a diverse population of class-action plaintiffs. There the Court held that they had long been viewed as procedural matters.
Erie Doctrine, state statute of limitations vs. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins: 447 U.S. 74 (1980) Federalism, freedom of speech Jenkins v. Anderson: 447 U.S. 231 (1980) Criminal defendant's silence prior to arrest may be held against him in court Agins v. City of Tiburon: 447 U.S. 255 (1980) Zoning and ...
Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147 (1959), was a U.S. Supreme Court case upholding the freedom of the press.The decision deemed unconstitutional a city ordinance that made one in possession of obscene books criminally liable because it did not require proof that one had knowledge of the book's content, and thus violated the freedom of the press guaranteed in the First Amendment. [1]
The single-subject rule is a rule in the constitutional law of some jurisdictions that stipulates that some or all types of legislation may deal with only one main issue. One purpose is to avoid complexity in acts, to avoid any hidden provisions that legislators or voters may miss when reading the proposed law.
On review of the license revocation, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin appears to have recognized that, under the Wisconsin statute, Welsh's license was wrongfully revoked if the officers who arrested him had violated the Federal Constitution. 108 Wis.2d 319, 321 N.W.2d 245 (1982). See Scales v. State, 64 Wis.2d 485, 494, 219 N.W.2d 286, 292 (1974).
This meant that after 1960, under German law, the statute of limitations for manslaughter crimes had expired. [53] In 1969, Germany revoked the statute of limitations for murder altogether, allowing direct murder charges to be prosecuted indefinitely. This was not always applied to Nazi war crimes which were judged by pre-1969 laws.