Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Speaking of a moot suit: procedure lesson accompanies rejection of English-only law case

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court declared the Arizona official English amendment litigation to be moot in Mar 1997 in a scathing opinion written by Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The federal courts' handling of the issue was procedurally flawed from the beginning and should have been settled at the state level. Ginsburg noted several procedural errors in the case, which lacked both an ongoing dispute and active parties. The 1988 law, requiring English to be spoken as the official language of Arizona, had been challenged originally by a state employee.

Author: Savage, David G.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1997
Practice, Procedure (Law), English-only movement, Ginsburg, Ruth Bader (American Supreme Court justice)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Spuds spur veto fight: plaintiffs charge Line Item Veto Act violates separation of powers

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court will decide whether Congress may have violated the Constitution and provided too much power to the President when passing the Line Item Veto Act. A group of potato farmers in Idaho and the city of New York are the basis for the Court's review of the 1996 Act. A federal court granted the farmers and New York City standing to seek relief from the President's cancellation of benefits granted these parties' by Congress.

Author: Savage, David G.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1998
Separation of powers, Standing (Law), Farmers, Item veto

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Let trial judges decide: High Court rejects a per se rule on polygraph evidence

Article Abstract:

The Supreme Court held that defendants do not have a constitutional right to admit favorable polygraph results. The Court did rule that district court judges could decide on a case by case basis to allow such evidence. The decision indicated the Court's reluctance to adopt the technology as a reliable evidentiary gathering tool.

Author: Savage, David G.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1998
Evidence (Law), Testimony, Lie detectors and detection, Lie detector tests

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Cases, Laws, regulations and rules
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: DOL considers whether existence of TPA combined claims account limits application of reporting exemption for small employer plans
  • Abstracts: The ABC's of EMG. The use of class actions in personal injury cases. Ex parte contacts with plaintiffs' treating physicians
  • Abstracts: Yes: discrimination helps companies trade on women's sexuality. No: a business has a right to choose its own character
  • Abstracts: Revised proposals on transfers Directive. Provision of Race Relations Act incompatible with EC law. Failure to implement Directive founds Francovich claim
  • Abstracts: Relaxing the regulatory stranglehold on communications. The Bay Bridge blunder
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.