Search

The article discusses the implications of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court on King v. Burwell, that challenges the phrase, an exchange established by the state, in section 36(B) of Affordable Care Act (ACA). Topics discussed include decision in favor of plaintiffs will result in millions of Americans losing their health insurance, Supreme Court to decide if intent of Congress is clear based on the law text, and focus on Chief Justice John G. Roberts Junior and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.

Discusses the implications of a case in which a school board voted to restrict student access to the Harry Potter books by J. K. Rowling in the school library. Views that the school board held about the books and why they did not wish students to read them; Way that the books deal with witchcraft and fantasy; Issues surrounding the restriction of student access to the Harry Potter books and similar literature; Examination of the constitutional restrictions on school library books that already exist; Description of the case Counts v. Cedarville School District; Concerns of the school board in this case about how the books could influence students; Decision of the court to overrule restrictions placed on the books.

The article details a lawsuit involving a student at Bret Harte Union High School in California who had been accommodated by Section 504 and by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) under the "other health impairment" classification. His parents claimed that the district denied an entitlement to "free appropriate public education" or FAPE. The case begins with an administrative impartial due process hearing and ends with a decision that suggests the court became impatient with both parties' actions. The case is an example of "needless adversariness" and "overlegalization" of special education.

This article comments on the decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court on the lawsuit filed by teacher Edward Stachura against the Michigan school district, the board of education and parents of students. On June 25, 1986 the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the decision of the lower courts in favor of Stachura and sent the case back to trial on the issue of damages. Writing for the court, Associate Justice Lewis Powell argued that the purpose of constitutional lawsuits is to compensate persons for injuries that are caused by the deprivation of constitutional rights. Allowing the jury to place a monetary value on the importance of the right violated, in Powell's view, focused not on compensation for provable injury, but on the jury's subjective perception of the importance of constitutional rights as an abstract matter. This, according to Powell, was inconsistent with previous cases holding that there cold be no compensatory damages for constitutional violations in the absence of proof of actual injury. The real problem with the Supreme Court decision in this case is that it fails to provide any standards by which Stachura could structure his evidence at the retrial and by which the judge could instruct the jury.

The article discusses the implications of a lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association that challenges a federal law which bars licensed gun dealers from selling handguns to 18- to 20-year-olds in Texas for gun litigation. It states that the decisions in the cases involving citywide handgun bans in Chicago, Illinois, and the District of Columbia have created a series of lawsuits by criminal defense attorneys and gun rights activists.

The article presents the author's opinion on the U.S. Supreme Court Case regarding the Safford Unified School District in Arizona, where a female school administrative assistant and a female nurse strip-searched Savana, who was a middle school student suspected of possessing prescription-strength Ibuprofen. The district's policy prohibited the possession of prescription-strength Ibuprofen unless the student had official permission to carry it at school. The decision on June 25, 2009 that the strip search violated the fourth amendment, and that the school official who ordered the search was entitled to qualified immunity from liability is considered. The author discusses the New Jersey v. T.L.O. case and why he believes that the Safford decision doesn't prevent strip searches.

The article discusses the negligence case between the West Baton Rouge School District in Louisiana and automotive mechanics teacher James Howard. The article describes how Howard's concealed a gun in the glove compartment of his car, which was subsequently stolen after he parked the car near the classroom of the school. The school board ruled that Howard acted in negligence while the Louisiana Supreme Court reversed the decision and ordered Howard's reinstatement. The subjectivity of the legal and judicial process is discussed, along with the effect of the Supreme Court's decision on educational policy.

The article reports on the conviction of Republican Senator Ted Stevens on seven counts of lying on his financial disclosure forms by a federal jury in the U.S. A number of senators including Republican presidential nominee John McCain called for Stevens' resignation. However, Stevens maintains his innocence and refused to resign.

The author reflects on the U.S. federal court case brought by the parents of a boy with severe asthma who died during a physical education class. The parents claimed that the school had been negligible and that under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, their son should have been exempt from certain activities. The author examines the judge's decision and interprets the laws that the parents used to argue their case.

This article examines Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Presented is the case of Gerald Hess, a teacher in New Hampshire who often left his students unsupervised and once struck a female student. When the school board voted for the firing of Hess, Hess filed a lawsuit against the school board, claiming he was discriminated against because he had Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. The court ruled in favor of the school board.

Discusses the civil rights suit Ronald DePace versus Maureen Flaherty. Incidents that led to the case; Court decision on the case; Amount of the settlement offered by the defendant.

Focuses on the lawsuit filed by physician and atheist Michael Newdow in the U.S. Federal District Court, claiming that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools violates the First Amendment's establishment clause. Details of the ruling of the Ninth Circuit; Significance of the Supreme Court's traditional tripartite test.

Discusses the ruling of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on a case filed by high school students and their parents against the Escambia, Alabama school district and two of its employees. Facts of the case; Reasons behind the ruling of the court; Arguments presented by guidance counselor Kay Rose and assistant principal Melvin Powell.

The article presents cases of supreme court decisions on free speech rights to teachers. Recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the case are: Perry v. Sindermann (1972), which held that a faculty member at a state college had the right to address a legislative committee; City of Madison Joint School District v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (1976), which held that a public school teacher had the right to make a statement about collective bargaining during a public session of a school board meeting; Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle (1977), which held that a public school teacher had the right to telephone a radio station about a proposed teacher dress code.

The article discusses the ruling issued by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television sparing Fox and ABC from ten-year-old fines as they were not given fair notice by regulators on partial nudity and use of expletives in live-broadcast awards shows.

The article reports on the decision of the U.S. Justice Department to end the six-year investigation on former House Majority leader Tom DeLay's ties to ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

The article discusses cases ruled by Sonia Sotomayor, U.S. President Barack Obama's pick for the Supreme Court which have attracted particular attention from both detractors and her promoters. Sotomayor was one of the three-judge panel that issued an unsigned opinion that rejects a defendant's claim on a state ban of a martial arts weapon. She was also one of three judges upholding a trial court's ruling which rejects the reverse-discrimination claims of 20 white firefighters.

The article reports on the decision of the federal court to hear the case of Senator Ted Stevens in Washington, D.C. Stevens requested that the be heard in Alaska but it was denied because it will disrupt the judge's other functions and will affect the request for speedy trial. Defense Lawyer Brendan Sullivan argued that the case should be heard in Alaska because the Stevens needs to campaign for the election. However, Stevens is more concern on the decision rather than campaigning.

The article reports on the status of the legal battle of U.S. Representative Jim McDermott against House Minority Leader John A. Boehner. McDermott has lost his case after the Supreme Court refused to review it and may have to pay Boehner $60,000 in damages. The court upheld a previous appeals court ruling that McDermott should not have exposed a tape-recorded telephone call involving Republican leaders. It remains unclear whether McDermott may use his legal-defense fund in paying Boehner.

The article focuses on a ruling issued by a panel of the Indiana Court of Appeals that the city of Gary could proceed to trial with its case alleging that 16 firearm manufacturers violated a state public-nuisance state by selling arms to dealers known for selling to criminals. The accused firearm manufacturers include Smith & Wesson Corp. and Beretta USA Corp. It mentions the dismissal of a lawsuit against the gun industry by D.C. Superior Court Judge Brook Hedge in 2006.

The article reports on a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reaffirming an earlier decision that Representative Jim McDermott is liable for damages in a case filed against him by House Minority Leader John A. Boehner. It says that the representative was not protected by the First Amendment when he accepted an illegally taped conversation between the minority leader and then-Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1996. Also noted are penalties imposed on McDermott.

The article discusses the ruling by chief federal district judge Vaughn Walker that denied the National Security Agency's (NSA) motion to dismiss a class action against AT&T when the company made client data available to the NSA, in April 2007. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a friend-of-the-court brief seeking to reverse the ruling that could undermine the vital cooperative relationship between business and government. But digital privacy advocates argue business should be transparent.

Reports that Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan has allowed federal prosecutors investigating allegations that Representative William J. Jefferson (D-La.) accepted bribes to resume their review of the materials confiscated from his congressional offices. Claims by Jefferson that the raid conducted was unconstitutional; Necessity of an advance notice from the Department of Justice before conducting a search; Opposition of House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) to the seizure.

Focuses on the decision to be made by the U.S. Supreme Court on a case concerning a 2004 ruling on a tax break granted by the Ohio state government to DaimlerChrysler for the expansion of a Jeep plant in Toledo. Violation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution by the deal according to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals; Significance of the judgment to be made by the Supreme Court; Plan of lobbying strategists to campaign to make state breaks legal if the case would be returned to the Circuit court.

Reports on the ruling of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in favor of Mark Mendel, lawyer of a co-founder of World Sports Exchange online gambling site, on a lawsuit he filed against the U.S. government over the 1978 Interstate Horseracing Act. Factor that led to the decision of Mendel to file the case; Possible actions to be taken by the U.S. government according to Greg Avioli, executive vice president of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, concerning gambling services; Assistance of Andrew Shoyer, a lawyer with at law firm Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, in the efforts of the association to respond to the WTO ruling.

Focuses on the decision issued by Texas State District Judge Joseph H. Hart that a political action committee run by the associates of U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay violated political action committee law. Fine imposed on Texans for a Republican Majority treasurer Bill Ceverha; Issues raised in the civil case; Implication of the decision for the political career of DeLay.

Presents information on the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit court decision on a case regarding the use of Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a nuclear waste repository. Background on the Yucca Mountain project; Reason for the decision; Arguments presented by the nuclear power industry.

Presents information on the appeal to be filed by Representative Ciro D. Rodriguez to the Texas Supreme Court regarding the results of the primary election on March 9, 2004. Background on the appeal; Refusal of Rodriguez to concede to his opponent Henry Cuellar; Details of the claims of Rodriguez.

Deals with the court ruling on the David M. Walker v. U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney case regarding the release of energy task force records given by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates, on December 9, 2002. Reason given by Judge Bates on his decision; Court ruling handed down by the Supreme Court in the Bowsher v. Merck case; Other rulings on related lawsuits against the energy task force lost by the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush.

The article analyzes the court cases which the U.S. Supreme Court handled in the year 1985. It is reported that, one of the cases was regarding school prayer and publicly funded programs in parochial schools. It is reported that, a lawsuit was filed by agnostic with children in public school in Mobile County, Alabama, Ishmael Jaffree, after he was unsuccessful in bringing halt to the practice of singing and reciting religious material in classrooms, which he termed as unconstitutional, and in which the court gave decision in favor of Jaffree. It is reported that, another case involved the viability and validity of creating an organization for carrying out prayers in schools.

This article focuses on the court decision that judiciary has no right to interfere with educational decisions. The parents of Thomas Rettig, in 1979 a 16-year-old autistic child asked that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio order the Kent City School District to provide their son with specific programs, such as summer classes and year round therapy. The lower court refused to require the programs, and the Sixth Circuit agreed. Frederick Compton, the attorney for the school district, said he is "extremely pleased" with the decision, which is "a complete and total win for us."