Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that convicted felons could be barred from voting beyond their sentence and parole without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
California v. Texas, 593 U.S. 659 (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the constitutionality of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA), colloquially known as Obamacare. It was the third such challenge to the ACA seen by the Supreme Court since its enactment.
Livermore V. Waite is an 1894 California Supreme Court ruling that limits the power of the legislature in making amendments to the California Constitution [1] by ruling that the power to change to the constitution cannot be delegated to any individual, as the sovereign power rests with the people.
The California Supreme Court has invalidated ballot measures after ruling them illegal constitutional revisions at least twice before: In 1948, the court removed a massive ballot measure that ...
The California Supreme Court on Thursday took the rare step of removing a measure from the November ballot that would have made it harder to raise taxes, siding with Gov. Gavin Newsom by ruling ...
Consequently, the Nevada Supreme Court deemed a new trial unnecessary, and simply reduced the damages granted to Hyatt to the permitted maximum. Because an earlier ruling by the Nevada Supreme Court in 2014 had limited FTB's liability to fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress (two torts), [24] the maximum award was set at $100,000.
Police officers cannot detain someone on the street just because that person acts furtively to avoid contact with them, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011), is a legal dispute that was decided by the United States Supreme Court. [1] [2] On April 27, 2011, the Court ruled, by a 5–4 margin, that the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 preempts state laws that prohibit contracts from disallowing class-wide arbitration, such as the law previously upheld by the California Supreme Court in the case of ...