5 posts tagged with supremecourt by bearwife.
Displaying 1 through 5 of 5.

Related tags:
+ (55)
+ (41)
+ (28)
+ (25)
+ (18)
+ (16)
+ (14)
+ (13)
+ (12)
+ (11)
+ (10)
+ (10)
+ (10)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (6)
+ (6)
+ (6)
+ (6)
+ (6)
+ (6)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (5)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)
+ (4)


Users that often use this tag:
homunculus (6)
bearwife (5)
mathowie (4)
monju_bosatsu (4)
Ty Webb (3)
baylink (3)
gerryblog (3)
amberglow (3)
ibmcginty (3)
XQUZYPHYR (2)
PrinceValium (2)
dejah420 (2)
East Manitoba Regi... (2)
saulgoodman (2)
serazin (2)
Kirth Gerson (2)
expriest (2)
Sticherbeast (2)
veruca (2)
nofundy (2)
Postroad (2)
aaron (2)
rschram (2)
The Supreme Court has affirmed the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Doe v. Reed (R-71 case) but don't celebrate yet. The Court rejected (.pdf format) the general claim that release of initiative petitions violates petition signer's First Amendment rights. But the Court's 8-1 ruling did not reach the petitioner's specific assertions that they will be harassed or harmed if their signatures are released in this case. That claim returns to the federal district judge who first issued the injunction against releasing names. Hence, the names of signers remain unrevealed at this time.
posted by bearwife on Jun 24, 2010 - 92 comments

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled unanimously against a fourth amendment claim of a right against an employer search of texts on a work pager. The decision, City of Ontario v. Quon, rejected the claims, by the officer and by others who texted him on the device, that the employer city and the city's service provider violated their rights by reviewing transcripts of the text messages. Justice Kennedy's decision assumed the officer had a reasonable expectation of privacy. However, he said, the city’s search was not unduly intrusive. There was a “legitimate work-related purpose” for the audit, Justice Kennedy wrote. The city “had a legitimate interest in ensuring that employees were not being forced to pay out of their own pockets for work-related expenses, or on the other hand that the city was not paying for extensive personal communications.” Interestingly, the officer's direct supervisor had told him that he could use the pager for personal messages, as long as he paid their cost. Kennedy nonetheless opined for the Court that he likely only had a "limited privacy interest." The Court did not reach the question of whether there is an employee privacy interest in email on work servers, or conversations on work telephones.
posted by bearwife on Jun 17, 2010 - 58 comments

On September 20, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument from a defendant convicted in 1993 by an all white jury in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The issue is whether the county's system of jury selection violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to be tried by a jury drawn from a fair cross section of the community. At the time of the 1990 census, African Americans composed 7.8% of eligible jurors in Kent County and 18.1% of eligible jurors in Grand Rapids. The defendant asserts, however, that they were routinely excused. All briefs can be reviewed here. Unless the Court chooses to decide the case on purely procedural grounds, it could set precedent with a significant impact on daily local jury selection.
posted by bearwife on Jan 15, 2010 - 78 comments

The Supreme Court has taken review in a case in which a law school barred a Christian legal group which apparently excludes non-Christian and LGBT students. The Hastings Christian Fellowship, a chapter of the Christian Legal Society, lost its official recognition as a student organization when it wouldn't agree to accept members and officers "regardless of their religion or beliefs about homosexuality" and ran afoul of the Hastings Law School's anti discrimination policy. The HCF sued and lost in district court and the 9th Circuit, which issued a two line order finding the law school's policy reasonable and content neutral. The 7th Circuit, by contrast, ruled in 2006 that such exclusion of the CLS by the Southern Illinois University law school violated the Society's free speech and expressive association rights. Today the Supreme Court, after some dithering, has accepted review of the case.
posted by bearwife on Dec 7, 2009 - 95 comments

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on the appeal of two "math geeks" who were denied a patent for a business method they developed for utility companies. This is one of the most watched cases of the Supreme Court term, drawing some 67 briefs. Although the patent office has recognized that business methods can be patented, it is not clear whether patents, developed to protect innovations like machines and transformative processes, are available for 21st century inventions such as software.
posted by bearwife on Nov 9, 2009 - 98 comments

Page: 1