Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Ambiguity (1)
- Anti-tax (1)
- Appropriation (1)
- Budget (1)
- Cognitive theory (1)
-
- Commercial speech (1)
- Conservative (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional duty (1)
- Constitutional provisions (1)
- Corporate speech (1)
- Corporation is a person (1)
- Crisis (1)
- Double jeopardy (1)
- Due process (1)
- Editorial (1)
- Educational (1)
- Elected (1)
- Election (1)
- Electorate (1)
- Federal (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fiscal (1)
- Fundamental (1)
- Funding (1)
- Governor (1)
- Impasse (1)
- Indian (1)
- Initiative (1)
- Initiative process (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Summary Of Young V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 98, Kristen T. Gallagher
Summary Of Young V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 98, Kristen T. Gallagher
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Defendant Young appealed his criminal conviction, specifically the district court’s decision to deny his motion to dismiss and appoint new counsel. Young maintained that the lower court did not properly inquire into the facts surrounding his motion.
Summary Of U. And Community C. Sys. Of Nev. V. Nevadans For Sound Gov't., 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 81, Clarke Walton
Summary Of U. And Community C. Sys. Of Nev. V. Nevadans For Sound Gov't., 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 81, Clarke Walton
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Respondent, Nevadans for Sound Government (NSG) is a political organization that gathers signatures on government owned property. NSG filed an action in district court alleging actions taken by Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) and University and Community College System of Nevada (UCCSN) unlawfully restricted access to RTC and UCCSN properties for signature collecting purposes. The district court concluded that certain actions by appellants unlawfully violated respondent's constitutional and statutory rights. The supreme court reversed the decision that respondent's constitutional rights were violated, and partially affirmed the decision that its statutory rights were violated.
Summary Of Heller V. Legislature, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 51, Keith Brown
Summary Of Heller V. Legislature, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 51, Keith Brown
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
On April 2, 2004, The Honorable Dean Heller, Secretary of State of the State of Nevada, sought an original petition for a writ of mandamus by the Nevada Supreme Court to compel the state Legislature (as a whole) to enforce separation of powers. The Secretary challenged whether state government employees’ service in the state Legislature (dual service) violated the constitutional separation of powers doctrine and questioned whether local government employees’ service in the Legislature also violated the separation of powers. The petition asked the court to: (1) find that service in the Legislature by “certain,” unidentified state executive branch employees …
Summary Of Aftercare Of Clark County V. Justice Court Of Las Vegas, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 2, Jeff Hall
Summary Of Aftercare Of Clark County V. Justice Court Of Las Vegas, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 2, Jeff Hall
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
No abstract provided.
What Is The Sound Of A Corporation Speaking? How The Cognitive Theory Of Metaphor Can Help Lawyers Shape The Law, Linda L. Berger
What Is The Sound Of A Corporation Speaking? How The Cognitive Theory Of Metaphor Can Help Lawyers Shape The Law, Linda L. Berger
Scholarly Works
This article argues that better understanding of metaphor's cognitive role can help lawyers shape judicial decision-making. As a way of exploring metaphor's contribution to shaping the law, the article focuses on how a particular lawsuit was influenced by metaphor, in particular, by the primary metaphor that a corporation is a person within the more complex metaphorical system suggested by the marketplace of ideas model for First Amendment protection. After describing the cognitive theory of metaphor and examining the metaphors underlying First Amendment protection for corporate speech, the article analyzes the use of metaphor in the briefs filed in the U.S. …
Double Jeopardy And Nonmember Indians In Indian Country, Terrill Pollman
Double Jeopardy And Nonmember Indians In Indian Country, Terrill Pollman
Scholarly Works
The ambivalence of the federal government to the sovereignty of native tribes is ordinarily a quiet fact of life in this country. Now, the federal circuits have disturbed that quiet by rendering opposing rulings on the question whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars successive tribal/federal prosecution of nonmember Indians in Indian Country. The Ninth Circuit has held the Double Jeopardy Clause does not present a bar to successive tribal/federal prosecutions. In contrast, the Eighth Circuit has held that the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits subsequent prosecution because the source of the tribe's jurisdiction, if it has jurisdictional power, is the same …
Courts Over Constitutions Revisited: Unwritten Constitutionalism In The States, Thomas B. Mcaffee, Nathan N. Frost, Rachel Beth Klein-Levine
Courts Over Constitutions Revisited: Unwritten Constitutionalism In The States, Thomas B. Mcaffee, Nathan N. Frost, Rachel Beth Klein-Levine
Scholarly Works
A good deal of modern debate in constitutional law has concerned the appropriate methods for construing constitutional rights. But the focus on “individual rights” has sometimes prompted us to pay too little attention to the “right” deemed most fundamental by those who brought us the state and federal constitutions: the right of the people collectively to make determinations about how they should be governed. The author demonstrates that the key to understanding the development of the power of judicial review, both by the United States Supreme Court and by the highest courts of the states, is to perceive courts as …
The Most Rational Branch: Guinn V. Legislature And The Judiciary's Role As Helpful Arbiter Of Conflict, Jeffrey W. Stempel
The Most Rational Branch: Guinn V. Legislature And The Judiciary's Role As Helpful Arbiter Of Conflict, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
When the Nevada Supreme Court decided Guinn v. Legislature, one would have thought from reading the popular press accounts that the court had forcibly displaced the State legislature by means of a violent coup d'etat. Newspaper accounts of the decision referred to it as a usurpation of power in violation of clear constitutional language, belittling the court in language sometimes more appropriate to the baseball bleachers than to serious editorial commentary. Following suit, politicized elements of the citizenry began a recall effort (seemingly unsuccessful as of this writing) directed at the court as well as joining the chorus of criticisms. …
Summary Of Heller V. Give Nev. A Raise, Inc., Timothy W. Roehrs
Summary Of Heller V. Give Nev. A Raise, Inc., Timothy W. Roehrs
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Direct democracy, the process by which the people conduct direct law making through the circulation of petitions and (subject to the petition qualifying) subsequent ratification by the voters in an upcoming election, has often been a hub for electoral and legal controversy.2 In GNAR,3 the Nevada Supreme Court drew on U.S. Free Speech Constitutional law to save a couple of 2004 ballot campaigns, while making the ballot process for future petitions (at least logistically) a little bit easier. Below is a description of the GNAR opinion and its holding, along with a few comments regarding GNAR’s questionable lack of deference …