News & Analysis as of

Remand First Amendment Appeals

Sunstein LLP

Bad Spaniels on Remand: Parody Provides an Escape from Infringement But Not From Dilution

Sunstein LLP on

The dispute at issue in Jack Daniel’s arises from a conflict between the well-known whiskey company and a dog toy company (VIP) regarding VIP’s unauthorized use of Jack Daniel’s trademarks and trade dress in connection with a...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Social Media

Supreme Court Clarifies The Boundaries Of Public Official Liability On Social Media

In its recent opinion in Lindke v. Freed, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed when public officials may be held liable for violating the First Amendment for silencing critics on social media. The Court held that a public...more

Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak

Supreme Court Issues Key Decisions on Public Officials’ Use of Social Media and Ability to Block Commenters

On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Lindke v. Freed and a per curiam opinion in O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier addressing when a public official may prevent a person from commenting on the public...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

Lawyer Discipline for Discriminatory Speech - A Pennsylvania Decision Raises Questions About Maryland Rule 19-308.4(e)

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

A federal judge has held that Pennsylvania’s Rule 8.4(g),1 which subjects lawyers to professional discipline for engaging in discriminatory conduct, violates both the free speech clause of the First Amendment and the due...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Thompson v. Hebdon

On November 25, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Thompson v. Hebdon holding that, in considering whether caps on individual campaign contributions violate the First Amendment, courts must compare the cap to others upheld...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Political Gerrymandering Non-Justiciable

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Late last week, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in two cases concerning the constitutionality of political gerrymandering: Rucho v. Common Cause, a case arising out of North Carolina, and Lamone v. Benisek, arising out of...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Rucho v. Common Cause

On June 27, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, holding that claims of partisan gerrymandering present nonjusticiable political questions that cannot be resolved by the federal courts under...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Following SCOTUS’ Lead, the Ninth Circuit Strikes Down a Ban on “Disparaging” Ads

Robins Kaplan LLP on

A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit has ruled that Seattle violated the First Amendment by banning “disparaging” ads on city buses....more

Ward and Smith, P.A.

Supreme Court Avoids a Decision on Partisan Gerrymandering

Ward and Smith, P.A. on

In advance of the midterm elections scheduled for November 6, 2018, many states are preparing for, or have already completed, their primary elections. Meanwhile, voters and state officials in Wisconsin and Maryland have...more

Sands Anderson PC

Supreme Court Leaves Big Partisan Gerrymandering Questions Undecided: Some Clues About What Happens Next

Sands Anderson PC on

On Monday the Supreme Court avoided deciding, once again, when, if ever, political gerrymandering violates the Constitution. In Gill v. Whitford, the Supreme Court was presented with startling evidence that Wisconsin...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Gill v. Whitford

On June 18, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Gill v. Whitford, No. 16-1161, holding that where voters assert that a state’s legislative districts have been improperly gerrymandered, those voters lack...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - March, 2017 #4

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in the following case today: Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, No. 15-1391: Five businesses in New York, petitioners here, wanted to pass along the...more

Stinson - Corporate & Securities Law Blog

Parties Request Judgment be Entered in Conflict Minerals Case

The conflict minerals case was remanded to the United Stated District Court for the District of Columbia for further proceedings. Judge Jackson ordered the parties to file a joint status report indicating whether any further...more

Knobbe Martens

Trademark Review | August 2015

Knobbe Martens on

The Redskins Lose Again (Off the Field)- A federal District Court affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s (TTAB) ruling that “Redskins” cannot be registered as a trademark for use in connection with a...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - July 2015

Employee's Inability To Work For A Particular Supervisor Does Not Constitute A "Disability" - Higgins-Williams v. Sutter Med. Found., 237 Cal. App. 4th 78 (2015) - Michaelin Higgins-Williams worked as a clinical...more

15 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide