Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Substantive due process is a principle in United States constitutional law that allows courts to establish and protect substantive laws and certain fundamental rights from government interference, even if they are unenumerated elsewhere in the U.S. Constitution.
The "polestar" of regulatory takings jurisprudence is Penn Central Transp. Co. v.New York City (1973). [3] In Penn Central, the Court denied a takings claim brought by the owner of Grand Central Terminal following refusal of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to approve plans for construction of 50-story office building over Grand Central Terminal.
The original rule required a third-party platform to send you a 1099-K if you had more than 200 business transactions in a given year on the platform, and only if those transactions combined added ...
That unprecedented challenge is required to root out the “persistent” racism in the way the state uses its capital punishment law, according to Patricia Okonta, an attorney at the Legal ...
The Supreme Court in March turned away a challenge to the 2018 tariffs by a group of U.S.-based steel importers. The justices in 2022 refused to hear a separate challenge by steel companies to ...
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 ...
Obamacare’s Medicaid Expansion Slashed The Uninsured Rate — And The GOP Wants To Take It Away Repealing The Affordable Care Act Would Undo Gains For Poor Families Across America. By Jeffrey Young, Nicky Forster, Hilary Fung, Alissa Scheller and Adam Hooper. Published Thursday, February 9, 2017 11:30 AM EST
"In essence, this money has been stolen from all of us for all these years," said an 84-year-old woman whose late husband's Social Security benefits were slashed. "It's not fair."