UNITED STATES
v.
ALASKA

U.S. | 1996-12-06
No. 84
519 U.S. 1025 Supreme Court of the United States (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Reno v. Am. Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (U.S. 1997)
    …1) and (2) is unqualified because those provisions contain no separate reference to obscenity or child pornography. The Government appealed under the CDA’s special review provisions, § 561, 110 Stat. 142-143, and we noted probable jurisdiction, see 519 U. S. 1025 (1996). In its appeal, the Government argues that the District Court erred in holding that the CDA violated both the First Amendment because it is overbroad and the Fifth Amendment because it is vague. While we discuss the vagueness of the CDA becau…
  • McMILLIAN v. Monroe Cnty., 520 U.S. 781 (U.S. 1997)
    …with the District Court that “Sheriff Tate is not a final policymaker for Monroe County in the area of law enforcement, because Monroe County has no law enforcement authority.” McMillian v. Johnson, 88 F. 3d 1573, 1583 (1996). We granted certiorari, 519 U. S. 1025 (1996), and now affirm. II A We held in Monell, 436 U. S., at 694, that a local government is liable under § 1983 for its policies that cause constitutional torts. These policies may be set by the government’s lawmakers, “or by those whose edicts…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw