NAAG is seeking articles from the attorney general community and academia to publish in the Attorney General Journal. View the submission guidelines to learn more.
Author
Topics
Year
Search
- Supreme Court
Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
This Report summarizes cases granted review on April 19 and 26, 2024 (Part I).
- Supreme Court
Garland v. VanDerStok, 23-852. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
This case involves the federal government’s attempted regulation of “firearms parts kits,” otherwise known as “ghost guns.” The Gun Control Act of 1986 (Act) imposes various licensing, background-check, recordkeeping, and serialization requirements on individuals engaged in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms.
- Supreme Court
Lackey v. Stinnie, 23-621. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
Under 42 U.S.C. §1988(b), the “prevailing party” in certain civil rights actions can recover reasonable attorney’s fees.
- Supreme Court
Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, 23-677. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
The Court granted certiorari to resolve whether a party can compel a remand to state court by amending the complaint to omit federal questions in an action that has already been properly removed to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1441(a).
- Supreme Court
Bufkin v. McDonough, 23-713. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
The issue presented is whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must “ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule,” set forth in 38 U.S.C. §5107(b), “was properly applied during the claims process [to] satisfy 38 U.S.C. §7261(b)(1), which directs the [court] to ‘take due account’ of [the Secretary of Veterans Affairs’] application of that rule.”
- Supreme Court
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, 23-583. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
The question presented is whether the Secretary of Homeland Security’s “decision to revoke the approval of an immigrant visa petition is subject to judicial review in district court.” The Immigration and Nationality Act provides “a two-step process through which a noncitizen may become a legal permanent resident” by marrying a U.S. citizen.
- Supreme Court
Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn, 23-365. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 11
At issue is whether economic harms resulting from personal injuries can be injuries to “business or property by reason of” the defendant’s acts for purposes of a civil treble-damages action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
- NAAG, Attorneys General
- Supreme Court
Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., 22-1165. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 10
In a unanimous decision, the Court held that “[p]ure omissions are not actionable under [Securities and Exchange Commission] Rule 10b-5(b).” Section 10(b) of the Security Exchange Act and its implementing regulation, SEC Rule 10b-5, “make[ ] it unlawful to omit material facts in connection with buying or selling securities when that omission renders ‘statements made misleading’” and provide for a private cause of action for such violations.
- NAAG, Attorneys General
- Supreme Court
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, 22-1074. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 10
The Court unanimously held that the Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative permit conditions. Petitioner George Sheetz owned property in El Dorado County, California and sought a permit to build a prefabricated home on his residential parcel of land.
- NAAG, Attorneys General
- Supreme Court
McIntosh v. United States, 22-7386. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 10
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B) requires a federal district court to enter a preliminary order of criminal forfeiture “sufficiently in advance of sentencing to allow the parties to suggest revisions or modifications before the order becomes final as to the defendant.”
- NAAG, Attorneys General
Rudisill v. McDonough, 22-888. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 10
In a 7-2 decision, the Court held that servicemembers who accrue educational benefits under separate GI bills by virtue of separate periods of service may use either entitlement, in any order, up to the 48-month aggregate-benefits cap set forth in 38 U.S.C. §3695(a). Since World War II, the federal government has enacted numerous GI bills to offer educational assistance to the country’s servicemembers.
- Supreme Court
Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, 22-193. | Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 10
The Court unanimously held that although an employee must show harm from a forced transfer to prevail in a Title VII suit, she need not show that the injury satisfies a significance test.
