Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Sessions v. Dimaya , 584 U.S. 148 (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), [ 1 ] a statute defining certain " aggravated felonies " for immigration purposes, is unconstitutionally vague .
Justice Douglas reversed for a 5-3 majority. He held that the provisions of 207(b) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 making the remedies provided in Title II of the Act the exclusive means of enforcing rights based on such part do not preclude a criminal prosecution of the defendants under 18 USC 241, since the exclusive-remedy provision applies only to enforcement of substantive rights to ...
United Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc. , 499 U.S. 187 (1991), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States establishing that private sector policies prohibiting women from knowingly working in potentially hazardous occupations are discriminatory and in violation of Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 ...
United States v. Johnson may refer to a variety of cases heard by the United States Supreme Court: United States v. Johnson, on a real estate claim; United States v. Johnson (1879), one of three cases consolidated into the Trade-Mark Cases; United States v. Johnson, on payment for services performed for the federal government; United States v.
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, by unanimous decision, that police may conduct a pat down search of a passenger in an automobile that has been lawfully stopped for a minor traffic violation, provided the police reasonably suspect the passenger is armed and dangerous.
In United States v. Johnson , 221 U.S. 488 (1911), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the misbranding provisions of the Pure Food and Drug Act [ 1 ] of 1906 did not pertain to false curative or therapeutic statements but only false statements as to the identity of the drug .
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect that House GOP leaders plan to file an amicus brief with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. House leaders led by Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La ...
Iowa, 18 Wall. 129, 134-35; Atherton Mills v. Johnston, 259 U.S. 13, 15. Whenever in the course of litigation such a defect in the proceedings is brought to the court's attention, it may set aside any adjudication thus procured and dismiss the cause without entering judgment on the [**1077] merits.