Search

The article states that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. government agency the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must reconsider rules concerning requirements on U.S. power plants to reduce mercury emissions and other pollutants on June 29, 2015. According to the article, the majority opinion was written by U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia. The article states that the administration of U.S. president Barack Obama would be pressured to rewrite EPA regulations on the issue.

The article states that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry in a 5-4 decision in the case Obergefell v. Hodges that was announced on June 26, 2015. According to the article, U.S. Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion of the Court and U.S. Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts and associate justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito filed dissents. The article discuses the significance of Kennedy in previous gay rights cases before the Court.

The article states that the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling on June 1, 2015, in favor of one-time retailer Abercrombie & Fitch Co. job applicant Samantha Elauf, who claimed she was denied a sales position because she wore a headscarf in accordance with Muslim traditions. According to the article, the majority opinion was written by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and stressed that U.S. law affords faith-based expression favored treatment and compelled employers to accommodate behavior they may not otherwise.

The article discusses questioning by U.S. Supreme Court justices during arguments in a U.S. Supreme Court regarding a case involving challenges to same-sex marriage bans in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee in late April 2015. The article examines questions posed to attorneys Mary Bonauto and John Bursch from U.S. Supreme Court justices Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito, and Antonin Scalia.

The article discusses a legal case in Texas that will challenge the doctrine of disparate impact. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to determine whether the state's policies for parceling out tax subsidies to developers of affordable housing violate the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Critics say the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs' practice of awarding affordable-housing subsidies in predominantly black neighborhoods promotes racial desegregation.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to accept challenges to bans on same-sex marriage in Tennessee, Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky that were upheld by the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Among plaintiffs seeking legalization of same-sex marriage are Timothy Love and Lawrence Ysuna in Kentucky and James Obergefell in Ohio. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the government would file a brief in support of the plaintiffs.

The article discusses state licensing, focusing on an antitrust case in the U.S. Supreme Court over whether state licensing boards can operate without government oversight. Topics include the dispute between the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners that started the case; a discussion whether the Board's cease and desist letters constitutes unfair competition; and a discussion of consumer safety.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court as of July 2014, focusing on its impact on business. Topics include Supreme Court Justices such as the Chief Justice John Roberts, rulings involving companies such as the retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., the oil field company Halliburton Co., and the juice company Pom Wonderful LLC, and public opinion concerning the Court's potential support of businesses.

The article discusses a June 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision which allows some companies such as the craft retail company Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. to invoke religious exemptions in the required provision of contraception coverage in employee health care plans. Topics include the comments of people such as the Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and other potential challenges to the U.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act health care legislation.

The article reports that on June 25, 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Aereo Inc.'s business model of streaming television broadcast signals over the Internet to subscribers' computers and other electronic devices violated the broadcasters' copyrights. In his majority opinion Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that Aereo closely resembled cable-television firms that pay fees to broadcasters such as CBS Corp. and 21st Century Fox for their content.

The article discusses a June 23, 2014 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that gives companies additional scope to have securities-fraud suits filed against them dismissed. Ruling in a case involving oil-services firm Halliburton Co., the Court's judgment upheld a precedent established by the 1988 case "Basic Inc. v. Levinson," which endorsed the co-called "fraud on the market" doctrine as a valid criterion for determining whether securities-fraud suits can be converted into class actions.

The article discusses oral arguments on April 22, 2014 before the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving several television broadcasting companies and Aereo Inc., a firm that streams television broadcasting signals over the Internet. CBS Corp., 21st Century Fox, and other broadcasters say Aereo's business is illegal. Sonia Sotomayor and John Roberts were among justices who expressed reservations about Aereo.

The article reports that on April 2, 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Rabbi Binyomin Ginsberg could not sue the Northwest Airlines subsidiary of airline Delta Air Lines for having ejected him from its frequent flyer program. Justice Samuel Alito wrote that a federal law on airline regulation passed in 1978 barred Ginsberg's suit.

The article reports that on April 2, 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court overturned aggregate limits on how much money an individual can contribute to political committees and federal political candidates during a two-year election cycle. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that such limits violated First Amendment rights of free speech. The case had originally been brought by Alabama businessman Shaun McCutcheon.

The article discusses constitutional religious protections for businesses in the U.S. by considering the case of retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. Founded in 1972 by David Green, Hobby Lobby has long expressed a devotion to religious faith. In 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear its challenge to provisions of the U.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requiring it to include coverage for certain contraceptives in employees' health plans.

The article discusses a case before the U.S. Supreme Court Rabbi Binyomin Ginsberg and Delta Air Lines Inc. Ginsberg is suing Delta for having kicked him out of its frequent-flier program. Delta claims Ginsburg abused the program by complaining too much and making reservations for full flights with the intention of collecting compensation for getting excluded (bumped) from those flights.

The article discusses a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case between crop-biotechnology company Monsanto Co. and Indiana farmer Vernon "Hugh" Bowman over his 2007 use of soybeans from crops grown by other farmers using seeds from Monsanto. According to Monsanto, its patent protection covers later-generations of its genetically engineered seeds. The authors examine how the case's ruling could impact other technology companies and also cover previous rulings on the case in lower federal courts.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear separate cases that challenge the constitutionality of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8, the state-wide ban on gay marriage in California. The former case is that of Edith Windsor, who was compelled to pay estate taxes after her spouse, Thea Clara Spyer, passed away. No tax would have been due had her spouse been male. INSET: Shifting Ground.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case of Kirtsaeng versus John Wiley & Sons as of October 29, 2012, with a focus on the legal implications for the resale of copyrighted items. Topics include an appeal by Supap Kirtsaeng regarding his conviction for copyright infringement for selling foreign-edition textbooks to U.S. students for less than the publisher John Wiley & Sons Inc.; the market for used books; and U.S. law regarding the resale of copyrighted products.

The article looks at an upcoming 2012 U.S. supreme court case involving a Florida marina and a houseboat owned by Fane Lozman. According to the author, the case will attempt to clarify what structures qualify as vessels and how it impacts federal maritime law. Other topics covered include laws concerning individuals who live at sea, dockside casinos, and Lozman's personal background.

The article states that the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments in several business cases for its 2012-13 term that begins in October 2012. According to the article, the court was scheduled to hear cases involving firms such as U.S. cable television operator Comcast Corp., Atlanta, Georgia, paper maker Georgia Pacific, and nonprofit corporation Phoebe Putney Health Systems as of July 2, 2012.

The article considers a hearing of the U.S. Supreme Court of a U.S. challenge to an Arizona immigration law. Statements made by judges of the court are cited as an indication that at least one element of the law which calls for police to check the immigration status of persons they stop on suspicion or for traffic offenses may be ruled as constitutional.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a U.S. action challenging a 2010 Arizona immigration law which requires police to check the immigration status of persons they interrogate or suspect of being illegal aliens. The case's implication for the federal-state government relationship is considered.

The article considers possible ramifications should the U.S. Supreme Court rule that the U.S. Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act medical care and health insurance law enacted in 2010 is unconstitutional. Disruptions in planning for health insurance companies are discussed. Patients who would lose health insurance are considered. The effect of such a ruling on the 2012 election for President is examined.

The article reports that several U.S. Supreme Court justices strongly questioned U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli during a hearing on an action brought against the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, the medical care and health insurance law proposed by President Barack Obama. The questioning is considered as an indication the court might find the law unconstitutional.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous judgment invalidating a patent held by the company Prometheus Laboratories on a medical test to assist physicians in drug administration in the treatment of Crohn's disease. The court ruled that informing physicians of new products was not patentable. Implications for the biotechnology industry, which strongly opposed the ruling, are discussed.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a complaint brought against the University of Texas, Austin against the school's use of race as a factor in its admissions. The university's policy is based on a 2003 Court judgment that racial diversity was a compelling state interest in higher education. The new case is considered as one in a group of cases to be heard by the court in 2012-2013 in which previous rulings could be overturned.

The article considers a January 10, 2012 hearing of the U.S. Supreme Court of actions by mass media industry firms Walt Disney Co. and News Corp. challenging the authority of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to issue fines and other penalties on broadcast television networks for indecent images or swearing. The impact of an expected 2012 ruling by the court on these cases on the competition between television networks and other mass media exempt from FCC regulations is discussed.

The article discusses the increasingly widespread use by state and federal law-enforcement personnel in the U.S. of cellphone-tracking to monitor peoples' whereabouts, and legal challenges to the practice. A key issue is whether authorities should be required to first obtain a warrant before tracking. A case before the U.S. Supreme Court involving Antoine Jones, a man who police tracked using a GPS (global positioning system) device, is seen as having relevance to phone-tracking's legality.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a sex-discrimination suit against retailer Wal-Mart Stores Inc. that sought to combine the grievances of 1.6 million alleged victims into a singe class action. In his majority opinion Justice Antonin Scalia said the plaintiffs lacked sufficient evidence to prove they had suffered a common injury.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has ordered the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia to review the 2006 bribery convictions of former HealthSouth Corp. chief executive Richard Scrushy and Don Siegelman, the former governor of Alabama. Both men were convicted in a case related to a $500,000 contribution from Scrushy to a cause favored by Siegelman.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled prosecutors in separate corruption cases involving former Hollinger International chief executive Conrad Black and former Enron Corp. chief executive Jeffrey Skilling made unconstitutional use of a U.S. law that criminalizes the deprivation of a person's "honest services."

The article reports on the consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court of whether policies at the University of Texas at Austin meet the standards set for the use of racial preferences in school admissions, presenting the view of Justice Anthony Kennedy on the issue.

The article reports on a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the case of Carol Sachs of California who sued a railway operated by state-owned OBB Personenverkehr AG in Innsbruck, Austria over a train accident that resulted to her leg amputation.

The article discusses a U.S. Supreme Court decision that will permit consumers to sue manufacturers of "light" cigarettes under state laws governing unfair trade. Philip Morris USA unsuccessfully argued that federal laws afforded protection against consumer litigation. The case arose from the state of Maine's contention that Philip Morris' Altria Group misrepresented the health risks of low-tar cigarettes.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case of Wyeth v. Levine. Wyeth is appealing a $6.7 million award to Diana Levine, who lost an arm to gangrene due to an improperly-administered nausea drug. Wyeth maintains the drug's label was approved by the Food & Drug Administration. At issue is whether more strict state laws can preempt federal ones.

The article discusses a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that will enable lawsuit by employees over losses sustained in 401(K) plans. At issue was the applicability of federal pension law to individual retirement plans. In the view of some, Chief Justice John Robert's minority opinion suggests how firms might fight such suits in the future.

The article reports on a January 16, 2008 meeting between U.S. Supreme Court justices and patent owners in the U.S. A discussion of changes in the way the Supreme Court has handled patent law and rulings concerning patent owners, and of Supreme court decisions that have reduced the power that patent owners, including Microsoft Inc. and eBay, have, is presented.

The article focuses on a U.S. Supreme Court case involving Alex Ferrer, the television judge featured in the television show "Judge Alex," and his former manager, Arnold Preston. The case centers on whether the ex-manager should have received commissions. An overview of the case and its history is provided. Particular focus is also given to the televising of court procedures, the possibility of the Supreme Court inviting in cameras, and the television appearances of Supreme Court justices.

The article reports on the role the U.S. Supreme Court will play in a legal battle between Stoneridge Investment Partners LLC and Scientific Atlanta Inc. which centers on whether defrauded shareholders should be allowed to sue not just a company that committed fraud but also its advisers, lawyers, accountants, and vendors. The impact a decision in the case could have on the cases of other companies that are facing fraud charges is discussed.

The article reports that the government's need for troops and the rights of schools to protest the Pentagon's policy toward openly gay soldiers are being legally tested in the realm of military recruitment. There is a case pending on whether the federal government can withdraw billions of dollars in funding from universities if they refuse to give military recruiters access to students on an equal footing with other employers. The case, Rumsfeld vs. FAIR, which is scheduled to go before the U.S. Supreme Court, has legal implications as well for the military's efforts to sign up high school students. However, it focuses on law schools because law faculties have resisted recruiters, objecting to the Pentagon's policy of forbidding openly gay soldiers from serving in the armed forces.

Focuses on a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court and how it is controlling securities fraud class-action lawsuits. Discussion of a dispute between federal appeals courts in the case brought by Dura Pharmaceuticals Inc. stockholders; The issue of inflated stock prices resulting from misrepresentation of two products: Albuterol Spiros asthma-spray device and Ceclor CD antibiotic; The opinion of Justice Stephen Breyer; The view of attorney Richard Bernstein on what the ruling means.

Reports on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that opens a new door for older workers to sue for age discrimination. Details of the court's ruling, which states that workers over 40 years old can sue when an employer's action has a disparate impact on their age group; Significance of the fact that workers no longer have to prove that the employer actually intended to discriminate; Analysis of the ruling, which marks a victory for older workers in the U.S.

The article states that the U.S. Supreme Court on June 29, 2015, denied an attempt by U.S. high-technology firm Google Inc. to overturn a ruling in favor of computer technology firm Oracle Corp. concerning an allegation that Google's Android smartphone operating system Android violated copyrights to Oracle's programming technology Java.

The article reports on a decision held by the U.S. Supreme Court, which says that Medicaid providers cannot file lawsuits against states claiming they were underpaid for medical services to the poor and ruled that the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services should be resolved Medicaid disputes.

The article discusses the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's ruling in a 2015 case involving Major League Baseball's exemption from U.S. antitrust laws and the possible move of the Oakland Athletics team to San Jose, California, focusing on a possible appeal of the legal case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The article discusses the definition of war under the False Claims Act (FCA) for civil and criminal lawsuits against companies for wartime fraud, the Kellogg Brown & Root Services v. U.S. ex rel. Carter Supreme Court case, and how proposed changes would impact the FCA's statute of limitations.

The article discusses a ruling by U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia and others on January 13, 2015, in a case examining the Truth in Lending Act, which would allow borrowers to rescind certain mortgages, rejecting the position of Bank of America Corp.'s subsidiary Countrywide Home Loans.

The author discusses the U.S. First Amendment as it pertains to free speech regarding religious displays and speech and consistent regulation and enforcement of free speech laws, including the Supreme Court case Police Department of Chicago v. Mosely and arguments to be heard by the Court in the case of Pastor Clyde Reed.

The article discusses the disappearance of plaintiff Bobby Chen who persuaded the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his pro se legal case regarding a torn down row house in Baltimore, Maryland, focusing on Chen's claim that the city illegally razed his house to conceal demolition-related property damage.