|
|
Browse by Tags
-
News came over the weekend of a state district court being overruled by a higher court. Ho hum, no news there, one would think, a routine occurrence…except this concerned stem cell research, and that is always newsworthy. The state was Missouri, and what [Read More]
|
-
In many respects, it has been a quiet term on the Supreme Court. However, on March 25, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Medellin v. Texas . It is a complicated case, but an intriguing one, for lawyers at least, and one with significant ramifications. [Read More]
|
-
Yesterday, a news story appeared about the striking down of an abortion-related law in The law, the Parental Notice of Abortion Act, has had a long history in the courts. As soon as it was passed in 1984, it was challenged in court, and enjoined. Challenges [Read More]
|
-
I used to work on Capitol Hill in D.C. My office was on the Senate side. It faced west. Every January I would see a huge group of people come streaming up the hill on Constitution Avenue, and turn right, heading toward the Supreme Court and passing in [Read More]
|
-
As noted in Part I (November’s column), I believe the European Court of Human Rights (“ECHR”) - whose decisions were cited, inter alia , by our Supreme Court in 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas - is increasingly involved in politically-driven decision-making. [Read More]
|
-
Though I promised in my last column to conclude a two-part series on judicial activism in Europe this month, I must postpone that until January. The reason is that an important development in bioethics demands our attention. A couple of weeks ago, in [Read More]
|
-
As I noted in a prior column, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas , in 2003, stirred up a firestorm. The reason was that the majority relied, in part, on European precedent, including decisions from the European Court of Human Rights [Read More]
|
-
There have been some strange legal developments in the United Kingdom that, I believe, should worry any thoughtful person. They center on decisions by a regulatory agency and by a Parliamentary committee in favor of the creation of human/animal hybrids. [Read More]
|
-
News came at the end of August that was startling – marriage, we discovered, is an irrational institution. Or at least, marriage as always understood in American history, that is, marriage between one man and one woman, is. (Remember that outlawing polygamy [Read More]
|
-
[Note: This article was written by William Saunders, Human Rights Counsel for FRC.] On August 2, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to approve the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the United States Court of Appeals for the 5h Circuit. Southwick has [Read More]
|
-
[Note: This article was written by William Saunders, Human Rights Counsel for FRC.] Yesterday, the Supreme Court closed its 2006/07 term by announcing several 5-4 decisions. In some, Justice Samuel Alito voted with a so-called “conservative” majority. [Read More]
|
-
[Note: This article was written by William Saunders, Human Rights Counsel for FRC.] During the first six years of his presidency, George W. Bush vetoed one bill, and one bill only. On July 19, 2006, President Bush vetoed a bill passed by Congress to overturn [Read More]
|
-
[Note: This article was written by William Saunders, Human Rights Counsel for FRC.] What is one to make of the Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision on April 18 in Gonzales v. Carhart , in which it upheld the Congressional statute banning partial-birth abortion? [Read More]
|
-
By William Saunders Sunday night, March 20, 2007, the Congress of the United States passed and President Bush signed into law, S. 686, “an act for the relief of Theresa Marie Schiavo”. This was well in keeping with Senate procedures – the Senate passes [Read More]
|
-
by Bill Saunders, FRC legal counsel As candidates begin preparation for the 2008 election season, people of faith will once again face the perennial admonition from liberal groups that the IRS requires "conservative" churches to be apolitical. This message [Read More]
|
|
|
|