Strict Scrutiny Standard

News & Analysis as of

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Race-Conscious Admissions Program

In a decision sending waves through the tertiary education community and beyond, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld—by a four to three vote—the University of Texas’ (the University) race-conscious admissions program as lawful...more

Supreme Court Upholds Consideration of Race in a College Admissions Program – What Does This Mean for Employer Diversity Efforts?

On June 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion for the second time in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, (Fisher II), a case that directly questioned whether race can be considered at all in college...more

High Court Finds UT Austin Race-Conscious Admissions Process Constitutional

In a 4-3 decision on Thursday, June 23, 2016, the United States Supreme Court upheld the University of Texas’s (UT) race-conscious admissions program. The decision addressed only UT’s specific admissions policy in effect...more

Fisher, the Sequel: Supreme Court Upholds Public University’s Affirmative Action Program

On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the race-conscious admission program that a public university used for undergraduate admissions was lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Affirmative Action Program at University of Texas

On June 23, 2016, in its second time hearing Fisher v. University of Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin. The Court held that the program is...more

Supreme Court Upholds University of Texas Affirmative Action Admissions Policy

The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge under the Equal Protection Clause to the University of Texas at Austin’s race-conscious admissions program in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (“Fisher II”). This...more

University’s Race-Conscious Admissions Program Upheld by Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court today affirmed the University of Texas at Austin's admissions program, which permits consideration of an applicant’s race as one of a number of factors in admissions decisions. Justice Kennedy authored...more

Supreme Court Decides Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, No. 14-981, holding that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits the University of Texas’ use of race-conscious...more

United States Supreme Court Upholds University of Texas Affirmative Action Policy

In a 4-3 decision released today, in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the United States Supreme Court affirmed that the University’s race-conscious admissions policy meets strict judicial scrutiny and is lawful under...more

The Supreme Court - June 2016

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in two cases on June 6, 2016: Simmons v. Himmelreich, No. 15-109: Respondent Walter Himmelreich, an inmate at a federal prison, brought two suits against prison...more

In re Tam Redux: The PTO seeks Certiorari

On April 20, 2016, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Federal Circuit seeking Supreme Court review of that Court’s decision in In re Tam, 117 USPQ2d 1001...more

Federal Circuit Rejects Disparaging Trademarks’ Ban on First Amendment Grounds

A December ruling by the Federal Circuit emphasized the value of commercial speech through trademark registration, and the case may have implications for the Washington Redskins. The NFL team’s Super Bowl dreams may be over,...more

Settlement with an Activist Investor is not a Defensive Measure

A recent case decided by the Delaware Court of Chancery, In Re Ebix, Inc., held settlement with an activist investor, Barrington Capital Group, L.P. was not a defensive measure subject to scrutiny under Unocal. Ebix entered...more

Washington Redskins Haven’t Won Yet: Why the Constitutionality of Section 2(a) is Not Yet Final

What do Washington D.C.’s NFL team, the Redskins, and Mr. Tam’s rock band, The Slants, have in common? Both have enjoyed unexpected victories recently and both have been called “disparaging” by the Patent and Trademark Office...more

Trademark Wars: The First Amendment Strikes Back – Lanham Act’s Disparaging Trademark Registration Ban Struck Down as...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, en banc, has ruled that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act precluding “disparaging” trademark registrations is unconstitutional, rejecting the argument that trademark...more

In re Tam: Section 2(a) Unconstitutional Under The First Amendment

In a landmark First Amendment decision relating to the Lanham (Trademark) Act, the Federal Circuit, en banc, struck down § 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), the statutory provision barring registration of...more

Federal Circuit Strikes Down Federal Ban on Disparaging Marks as Unconstitutional

In a landmark ruling that departs from decades-old precedent, on December 22, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the Lanham Act’s prohibition of “disparaging marks” violates the First...more

Constitutionality of 8(a) Program Reaffirmed

Earlier this year, a judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia reaffirmed the facial constitutionality of the 8(a) Program in response to a challenge by a small business owner, and he also rejected an...more

Eleventh Circuit Strikes Down Florida’s No-Surcharge Law

On November 4, 2015, the Eleventh Circuit struck down Florida’s no credit-card surcharge statute as unconstitutional under the First Amendment. See Dana’s Railroad Supply v. Attorney General, Florida, No. 14-14426, 2015 WL...more

Municipal Legal News: Volume 1, Number 2 November 2015

Employment Requirements for Building Officials - The Michigan Attorney General has interpreted a recent law requiring municipal building officials to be “employed” by a municipality to mean that building officials cannot...more

What Should Employers Expect During The New Supreme Court Term?

The first Monday in October is the traditional first day of a new U.S. Supreme Court term.  As always, the 2015-16 term will have several cases that are of particular interest to the nation’s employers.  Here is a review of...more

The Newest Sign for Some Sign Ordinances: Stop

Sign ordinances and regulations are a fixture of city and county zoning and land use regulations, designed to prevent unattractive clutter from obstructing the public view. In creating these regulations, however, local...more

Supreme Court Decides Two First Amendment Cases

Two recent Supreme Court decisions provide timely guidance on the First Amendment implications of publicly displaying the Confederate Flag or other symbols or signage related to protected beliefs. First, in Walker v. Sons of...more

Arizona Town's Content-Based Sign Rules Struck Down by U.S. Supreme Court

Local agencies urged to review sign codes in favor of content-neutral rules - The United States Supreme Court recently struck down portions of an Arizona town’s sign code that subjected ideological, political and...more

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ordinance Regulating Directional Signs

In the case of Reed v. Town of Gilbert, the United States Supreme Court recently issued a significant decision regarding municipal sign regulation The Town of Gilbert regulated signage differently based on the content of the...more

46 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×