An injunction is a legal and equitable remedy in the form of a special court order that compels a party to do or refrain from specific acts. "When a court employs the extraordinary remedy of injunction, it directs the conduct of a party, and does so with the backing of its full coercive powers." A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties, including possible monetary sanctions and even imprisonment. They can also be charged with contempt of court. Counterinjunctions are injunctions that stop or reverse the enforcement of another injunction.
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the Commerce Clause gave the U.S. Congress power to force private businesses to abide by Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations.
Stanford Law School is the law school of Stanford University, a private research university near Palo Alto, California. Established in 1893, Stanford Law has been ranked one of the top three law schools in the United States, with Yale Law School and Harvard Law School, every year since 1992. Since 2016, Stanford Law has been ranked second, overtaking this position of Harvard Law School for five consecutive years as of 2021. Stanford Law is consistently regarded as one of the most prestigious law schools in the world, and its median undergraduate GPA of 3.93 is the highest of any U.S. law school. It also has the highest percentage of recent graduates clerking for federal judges.
Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights is a European Union directive in the field of intellectual property law, made under the Single Market provisions of the Treaty of Rome. The directive covers civil remedies only—not criminal ones.
The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing is an agency of California state government charged with the protection of residents from employment, housing and public accommodation discrimination, and hate violence. It is the largest state civil rights agency in the United States. It also provides representation to the victims of hate crimes. Originally a division within the Department of Industrial Relations, DFEH became a separate department in 1980. DFEH has a director who is appointed by the governor of California and maintains a total of five offices and five educational clinics throughout the state. Today, it is considered part of the California Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency.
Florence Wagman Roisman is the William F. Harvey Professor of Law at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. She is best known for her work in low-income housing, homelessness, and housing discrimination and segregation. In the fall of 2006, Roisman was the Skelly Wright Fellow at Yale Law School.
The Electronic Filing System is the Singapore Judiciary's electronic platform for filing and service of documents within the litigation process. In addition, it provides the registries of the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts with an electronic registry and workflow system; and an electronic case file. Recent enhancements have added a module which facilitates the conduct of hearing using documents that have been electronically filed.
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia, 348 F. Supp. 866, was a lawsuit filed against the District of Columbia in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The court ruled that students with disabilities must be given a public education even if the students are unable to pay for the cost of the education. The case established that "all children are entitled to free public education and training appropriate to their learning capacities". Peter D. Roos, a former staff attorney at Harvard University's Center for Law and Education, described Mills as a "leading case" in a series of lawsuits that attempted to provide access to education for children with disabilities. Mills v. Board was a certified class action lawsuit under Rule 23(b)(1) and (2). These subsections identify a violation of the right to equal treatment under law in a way that would obstruct the ability to protect one's interest as an individual member of a common class. Additionally, subsection b(2) describes a case with refusal of the opposing party to rectify the transgression to a degree that merits corrective adjudication. This was a broad interpretation of the 14th Amendment due process clause of law and was used to make changes to local school district policy.
The Unruh Civil Rights Act is an expansive 1950s California law that prohibits any business in California from engaging in unlawful discrimination against all persons (consumers) within California's jurisdiction, where the unlawful discrimination is in part based on a person's sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status.
Prison Legal News (PLN) is a monthly American magazine and online periodical published since May 1990. It primarily reports on criminal justice issues and prison and jail-related civil litigation, mainly in the United States. It is a project of the Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC), a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.
Alexander v. Yale, 631 F.2d 178, was the first use of Title IX in charges of sexual harassment against an educational institution. It further established that sexual harassment of female students could be considered sex discrimination, and was thus illegal.
The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) of 1980 is a United States federal law intended to protect the rights of people in state or local correctional facilities, nursing homes, mental health facilities and institutions for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Brown v. Plata, 563 U.S. 493 (2011), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that a court-mandated population limit was necessary to remedy a violation of prisoners’ Eighth Amendment constitutional rights. Justice Kennedy filed the majority opinion of the 5 to 4 decision, affirming a decision by a three judge panel of the United States District Court for the Eastern and Northern Districts of California which had ordered California to reduce its prison population to 137.5% of design capacity within two years.
Patent law in modern mainland China began with the promulgation of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China, in 1984. In 1985, China acceded to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, followed by the Patent Cooperation Treaty in 1994. When China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, it became a member of the TRIPS agreement.
Margo Jane Schlanger is a Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School, and the founder and director of the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. From 2010-2012, while on leave from her professorial position, she served as the presidentially-appointed Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the United States Department of Homeland Security. As the top civil rights official at the Department of Homeland Security, Schlanger led the office that advises Department leadership about civil rights and civil liberties issues, engages with communities whose civil rights and civil liberties may be affected by Department activities, investigates and resolves civil rights complaints, and leads the Departments equal employment opportunity program. Schlanger's major initiatives as Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer included: creating and managing a structure for overseeing the Department's controversial Secure Communities program to ensure that it did not serve as a conduit for unconstitutional practices by local law enforcement agencies in jurisdictions covered by the program; publishing guidance for agencies that receive DHS funding on providing meaningful access to people with limited English proficiency; working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on the reform of detention practices; and improving the Department's civil rights complaint process.
Phyllis W. Cheng is an American lawyer providing mediation, investigation and expert witness services in Los Angeles, California. She retired as a partner from DLA Piper LLP (US), a global law firm, where she practiced employment law representing businesses. Before that, Cheng served for nearly seven years as director of the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), the largest state civil rights agency in the country.
Brooke E. Lierman is an elected official in the U.S. state of Maryland who serves District 46 in the Maryland House of Delegates since 2015. She is a member of the Democratic Party.
Executive Order 13769 was signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on January 27, 2017, and quickly became the subject of legal challenges in the federal courts of the United States. The order sought to restrict travel from seven Muslim majority countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The plaintiffs challenging the order argued that it contravened the United States Constitution, federal statutes, or both. On March 16, 2017, Executive Order 13769 was superseded by Executive Order 13780, which took legal objections into account and removed Iraq from affected countries. Then on September 24, 2017 Executive Order 13780 was superseded by Presidential Proclamation 9645 which is aimed at more permanently establishing travel restrictions on those countries except Sudan, while adding North Korea and Venezuela which had not previously been included.
Fant v. The City of Ferguson is a putative class action claim was filed on May 26, 2015 against the City of Ferguson, Missouri. The claims were pursuant of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, where the code lays out the applicability, or lack thereof, for the legal deprivation of rights. The multiple plaintiffs claimed that the City of Ferguson had violated their constitutional rights, namely the 4th, 6th, and 14th amendments.
Wolf v. Vidal, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a case that was filed to challenge the Trump Administration's rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Plaintiffs in the case are DACA recipients who argue that the rescission decision is unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment. On February 13, 2018, Judge Garaufis in the Eastern District of New York addressed the question of whether the government offered a legally adequate reason for ending the DACA program. The court found that Defendants did not provide a legally adequate reason for ending the DACA program and that the decision to end DACA was arbitrary and capricious. Defendants have appealed the decision to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
