Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The U.S. Court of Appeals rejected the city's argument. The Hermosa Beach Municipal Code banning tattoo shops was not narrowly tailored to achieve the city's interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens. The ordinance was too broad and banned speech that is traditionally protected under the First Amendment.
Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the right of lawyers to advertise their services. [1] In holding that lawyer advertising was commercial speech entitled to protection under the First Amendment (incorporated against the States through the Fourteenth Amendment), the Court upset the tradition against advertising ...
Oral argument is not always considered an essential part of due process, as the briefs also give the parties an opportunity to be heard by the court. Whether a court will permit, require, or guarantee the opportunity to present oral argument is a decision usually left up to each court to decide as part of its rules of procedure, with ...
(The Center Square) – U.S. District Court Judge John Robert Blakey of the Northern District of Illinois is reviewing jury instructions ahead of closing arguments at the public corruption trial ...
Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld, against a First Amendment challenge, the policy of the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, governing official recognition of student groups, which required the groups to accept all students regardless of their status or beliefs in order to obtain ...
Cook v. Gates, 528 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2008): "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy upheld against due process and equal protection Fifth Amendment challenges and a free speech challenge under the First Amendment. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011): First Amendment right to photograph public officials in a public place.
Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a "breach of peace" ordinance of the City of Chicago that banned speech that "stirs the public to anger, invites dispute, brings about a condition of unrest, or creates a disturbance" was unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States ...
Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, No. 16-1466, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), abbreviated Janus v.AFSCME, is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on US labor law, concerning the power of labor unions to collect fees from non-union members.