The landmark litigation, Near v. Minnesota, began in the Roaring Twenties. It concerned Minnesota’s Public Nuisance law, a measure known as the “Gag Law.”
Minnesota courts infrequently hear, and usually refuse, pleas for changing venue.
Whistleblowers have caught plenty of flak from the Trump administration, but the government has not been alone in its censorial impulses and punitive sanctions.
President Lincoln attributed his 1864 victory, following a number of major advances and triumphs by the Union army, to the aversion of the voters “to change horses in the middle of the stream.”
The ratification in mid-January by the Virginia state legislature of the longstanding but inert Equal Rights Amendment has focused attention on the measure’s viability in the nation’s capital.
The decision involved people who are partners or principals. But the reasoning of the ruling is not restricted to big law firms or to compulsory retirement programs at them or other enterprises.
Minnesota law says illegal harassment consists of unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature that is “severe or pervasive.”
The case, a combination of three separate lawsuits, addresses whether the federal anti-discrimination employment laws extend to lesbians, gays, bisexual, and transgender individuals.
Judicial rulings often do reflect the ideology and even partisan leanings of those who appoint them to the bench.
The lack of empirical basis connecting violent videos and anti-social behavior has been noted in court cases around the country, including landmark litigation here in Minnesota.
The no-indictment-while-in-office opinion has minimal legal footing and even less factual foundation. Rather than being revered, it should be reversed.
The St. Louis Park brouhaha over the Pledge recalls its colorful, somewhat checkered past — including turbulence here in Minnesota during the governorship nearly two decades ago of Jesse Ventura.
Although imperfect, the new Minnesota criminal measure penalizing wage theft is considered one of the strongest of its kind in the nation.
The pro cameras-in-courtrooms crowd has managed to achieve breakthroughs in Minnesota in several matters recently.
At first blush, the House committee’s request seems like a no-brainer — that the requesting Democrat has a slam-dunk, will easily prevail, and the president will not. But, wait – it is not so simple.
The 210th birthday of the Great Emancipator provides an opportune occasion to correct the misconception held by some that the state was not soiled by the scourge of slavery.
The death earlier this month of Minnesota Vikings icon Bill Brown, at age 80, brought back memories of a little-known segment of his career and its place in the evolution of professional athletics.
This proposition could have merit and be accomplished without invoking a laborious and an implausible ratification or legislative process.
Some of society’s greatest advancements through the judiciary have been the products of reversals of precedent.
The state Supreme Court blew a whopping hole in the law last month in a case entitled Funk v. O’Connor.