Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Gilbert v. Minnesota, 254 U.S. 325, was a case heard and decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1920. [1] The case concerned the right to freedom of speech. [2] The Court held that while the First Amendment to the United States Constitution applies to the States, Minnesota's sedition act could stand. [3]
Olson filed a complaint against Near and Guilford under the Public Nuisance Law of 1925. [6] Also known as the "Minnesota Gag Law", it provided permanent injunctions against those who created a "public nuisance," by publishing, selling, or distributing a "malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspaper." Olson claimed that the allegations raised ...
Republican Party of Minnesota v. White , 536 U.S. 765 (2002), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the First Amendment rights of candidates for judicial office. In a 5–4 decision, the court ruled that Minnesota's announce clause, which forbade candidates for judicial office from announcing their views on disputed ...
Several states prohibited any type of campaigning within the polling place. Minnesota's polling place law (Minnesota Statutes Section 211B.11), passed in 1889, included an apparel ban that prevented voters from wearing any type of clothing that bore a "political" message. This was one of the most restrictive laws of this type in the country. [2]
Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U.S. 456 (1981), was a United States Supreme Court case which found no violation of the equal protection or commerce clauses in a Minnesota state statute banning retail sale of milk in plastic nonreturnable, nonrefillable containers, but permitting such sale in other nonreturnable, nonrefillable containers.
The Minnesota Constitution is the supreme law in the state. Minnesota Statutes are the general and permanent laws of the state. [1] Minnesota Laws (also referred to as Minnesota Session Laws, Laws of Minnesota, or simply "session laws") are the annual compilation of acts passed by the Minnesota Legislature and signed by the governor of Minnesota, or enacted by the legislature when overriding a ...
A dissent in part is a dissenting opinion which disagrees selectively with one or more parts of the majority holding. In decisions that require holdings with multiple parts due to multiple legal claims or consolidated cases, judges may write an opinion "concurring in part and dissenting in part".
Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States.The Court unanimously held that, when a police officer who is conducting a lawful patdown search for weapons feels something that plainly is contraband, the object may be seized even though it is not a weapon.