| JURIST Search: "alito" | |
| Searching the JURIST archive... |  |
|
 |
|
Justice O'Connor retired from US Supreme Court [this day at law]
July 1, 2012 by Kimberly Bennett
On July 1, 2005, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the US Supreme Court. On July 7, 1981, President Ronald Reagan appointed her to the Supreme Court as the first ever female Supreme Court Justice. She was succeeded by Justice Samuel Alito. Justice O'Connor's voting record.... [more]
President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to Supreme Court [this day at law]
October 3, 2011 by Clay Flaherty
On October 3, 2005, President George Bush nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as an Associate Justice on the US Supreme Court. Miers faced ideological criticism from conservative activist groups, frustrated questioning from the Senate Judiciary.... [more]
Supreme Court ruled Second Amendment applies to states [this day at law]
June 28, 2011 by Clay Flaherty
On June 28, 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. Chicago that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to bear arms applicable to the states as well as the federal government. The case arose over a Chicago ordinance which effectively banned the.... [more]
Supreme Court rules evidence not excluded when law changes between search and trial
June 16, 2011 by Julia Zebley
The US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 7-2 in Davis v. United States that when the law for what constitutes a legal search changes between a search and an accompanying trial, the evidence is not excluded. Justice Samuel Alito's opinion states that because suppression of the evidence would do.... [more]
US Senate voted to confirm Supreme Court nomination of Samuel Alito [this day at law]
January 31, 2011 by Dwyer Arce
On January 31, 2006, the US Senate voted 58-42 to approve the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito of the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to serve as an Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court. Alito replaced Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who had announced her retirement the previous July..... [more]
court left open issue of compelling state interest in preventing animal cruelty [comment]
April 22, 2010 by Andrew Wood
Matthew Liebman: The Animal Legal Defense Fund filed an amicus brief in defense of 18 U.S.C. Section 48, so we are obviously disappointed by the Court's opinion in United States v. Stevens. Nevertheless, we are heartened by Justice Alito's dissent and the way in which the majority ch....... [more]
Supreme Court rules third parties may intervene in Carolina water dispute
January 20, 2010 by Jaclyn Belczyk
The US Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled in South Carolina v. North Carolina that the Catawba River Water Supply Project (CRWSP), and Duke Energy Carolinas may intervene in the water dispute between the two states, but that the city of Charlotte, North Carolina, may not. A special master.... [more]
Oral arguments in highlight flaws in campaign finance laws [comment]
March 25, 2009 by Andrew Wood
Steve Simpson: In the case of Citizens United v. FEC, the US Supreme Court confronted the inescapable logic of the campaign finance laws: if the government can ban a broadcast advertisement that is paid for by a corporation, then it can ban movies and even books as well. In fact, during the a....... [more]
Baze decision masks division over capital punishment [comment]
April 18, 2008 by Andrew Wood
Laura Porter: The Supreme Court issued its decision in the case of Baze v Rees this week, upholding the constitutionality of Kentucky's lethal injection protocols. Texas has already taken the Court's ruling as a green light to set an execution date- the first of dozens of cases that....... [more]
Alito disparages televising of Supreme Court proceedings
October 20, 2007 by Howard Kline
US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Friday became the latest high court member to publicly criticize the possibility of televising the court's proceedings. Speaking at the University of Virginia, Alito joked that televising the proceedings would be a mistake since it would directly compete....... [more]
|
|
|
|