Supreme Court skeptical of married couple’s right to challenge visa denial over gang tattoos
The high court seemed unconvinced that marriage rights outweighed national security interests.
The case centers on whether courts should use a more stringent test when weighing a National Labor Relations Board request for a temporary injunction.
The high court seemed unconvinced that marriage rights outweighed national security interests.
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit denied a pilot’s petition for review of an order affirming the revocation of his pilot certificate. The pilot transported marijuana, which is legal in Alaska but a controlled substance under federal law, by aircraft within the state, which prompted the Federal Aviation Administration to revoke his pilot certificate. The FAA does not lack jurisdiction, as he says, on the theory that Congress cannot authorize an administrative agency to regulate intrastate commerce such as marijuana delivery within Alaska.
Prison inmates who have been convicted of crimes must be paid a prevailing wage, but state law doesn't require county jail detainees to be paid anything.
An Oregon city's ordinance against public camping has the high court contemplating whether involuntary homelessness could be punished.
Six months ago, the justices ruled in an emergency order the Biden administration could enforce the 2022 rule for the time being.
The judge denied the United States’ attempt to delay a 2015 climate change lawsuit while recommending that the Ninth Circuit also deny the feds’ arguments for dismissal.
CHICAGO — The Seventh Circuit ruled that the Illinois Department of Corrections may not outright ban parents convicted of sex offenses from speaking on the phone to their children while they are on supervised release. The government may implement call monitoring to minimize the risk of abuse as an alternative to the ban.
The case stems from the termination of seven Starbucks employees at a store in Memphis, Tenn., as they were trying to unionize.
CHICAGO — The Seventh Circuit denied a class of trans kids and their families’ motion for reconsideration of the appeals court’s decision allowing a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, which was signed into law last April. The one-page ruling does not explain the court’s reasoning; four of the judges voted to rehear the matter en banc.
How and when the Supreme Court resolves Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim will determine whether voters know if Trump is criminally culpable for election subversion efforts in 2020 before voting in 2024.