Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992) was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States, and the court had previously held in "Batson v. Kentucky" a case in which year?
41879b18c01cd85bf74c4c41a50bd125
Georgia v. McCollum Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992) was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a criminal "defendant" cannot make peremptory challenges based solely on race. The court had previously held in "Batson v. Kentucky" (1986) that prosecutors cannot make peremptory challenges based on race, but didn't address whether defendants could use them. The court had already ruled in "Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company" (1991) that the "Batson" prohibition also applies to civil litigants because they are state actors during the jury selection process.
265af3308b902064face84cf08e59063
Batson v. Kentucky Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that a prosecutor's use of peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race. The Court ruled that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case gave rise to the term "Batson challenge", an objection to a peremptory challenge based on the standard established by the Supreme Court's decision in this case. Subsequent jurisprudence has resulted in the extension of "Batson" to civil cases ("Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company") and cases where jurors are excluded on the basis of sex ("J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.").
914bd6bb2157878e4111a719299804ad
Carol W. Hunstein Carol W. Hunstein (born August 16, 1944) is a Justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia. She has served on the court since 1992.
d4b3644b1de8eb393129cf4e86ce6343
Champion v. Ames Champion v. Ames, 188 U.S. 321 (1903) , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that trafficking lottery tickets constituted interstate commerce that could be regulated by the U.S. Congress under the Commerce Clause.
7b07d87387cebccd488c194ded46eadc
Jacobson v. Massachusetts Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that the freedom of the individual must sometimes be subordinated to the common welfare and is subject to the police power of the state.
38286671c274c7c32e6f95418a220db4
Kansas v. Carr Kansas v. Carr, 577 U.S. ___ (2016) was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States clarified several procedures for sentencing defendants in capital cases. Specifically, the Court held that judges are not required to affirmatively instruct juries about the burden of proof for establishing mitigating evidence, and that joint trials of capital defendants "are often preferable when the joined defendants’ criminal conduct arises out of a single chain of events". This case included the last majority opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia before his death in February 2016.
2bab2d247d03640412e5a67b5fb57f97
Clawson v. United States Clawson v. United States, 113 U.S. 143 (1885) , was a case regarding a Utah territorial statute which authorized an appeal by a defendant in a criminal action from a final judgment of conviction, which provides that an appeal shall stay execution upon filing with the clerk a certificate of a judge that in his opinion there is probable cause for the appeal, and further provides that after conviction, a defendant who has appealed may be admitted to bail as of right when the judgment is for the payment of a fine only, and as matter of discretion in other cases, does not confer upon a defendant convicted and sentenced to pay a fine and be imprisoned the right, after appeal and filing of certificate of probable cause, to be admitted to bail except within the discretion of the court.
527da3cd211a174139fcd66a59375750
United States v. Loew's Inc. United States v. Loew's Inc., 371 U.S. 38 (1962), was an antitrust case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that block booking of movies—the offer of only a combined assortment of movies to an exhibitor—violates the Sherman Antitrust Act.
90daeabbebd8c31fb03e39500d117790
Pace v. Alabama Pace v. Alabama, 106 U.S. 583 (1883), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court affirmed that Alabama's anti-miscegenation statute was constitutional. This ruling was rejected by the Supreme Court in 1964 in "McLaughlin v. Florida" and in 1967 in "Loving v. Virginia". "Pace v. Alabama" is possibly the first recorded interracial sex court case in America.
d61b5f6d4158812158a0a74128267b03
Runyon v. McCrary Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (1976), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court, which held that federal law prohibited private schools from discriminating on the basis of race. Dissenting Justice Byron White argued that the legislative history of  /1981 § 1981  (popularly known as the "Ku Klux Klan Act") indicated that the Act was not designed to prohibit private racial discrimination, but only state-sponsored racial discrimination (as had been held in the "Civil Rights Cases" of 1883).
4e3234f3d42cf85147cb1e16e3c2f986
Horace Elmo Nichols Horace Elmo Nichols (July 16, 1912 – June 8, 2000), also known as H. E. "Nick" Nichols, was an American jurist in Georgia who served as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia from 1975 to 1980.
c0fc7e8c5b38915062d27dfe218d6e6f
Georgia Court of Appeals The Georgia Court of Appeals is the intermediate-level appellate court for the U.S. state of Georgia.
3d27d5773ca3422bd1ab4ac22d6add3e
Alabama v. Georgia State of Alabama v. State of Georgia, 64 U.S. 505 (1860), is a 9-to-0 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the true border between the states of Alabama and Georgia was the average water mark on the western bank of the Chattahoochee River. In coming to its conclusion, the Court defined what constituted the bed and bank of a river. The case has had international repercussions as well. The Supreme Court's definition was adopted by courts in the United Kingdom in the case "Hindson v. Ashby" (1896) 65 LJ Ch. 515, 2 Ch. 27.
ca44025bcffa5686a89cbc11010e3c32
United States v. Miller United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) , was a Supreme Court case that involved a Second Amendment challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). "Miller" is often cited in the ongoing American gun politics debate, as both sides claim that it supports their position.
ca0f0eb187671fb07e3fc7be7de414e2
Attorney General of Kentucky The Attorney General of Kentucky is an office created by the Kentucky Constitution. (Ky.Const. § 91). Under Kentucky law, he serves several roles, including the state's chief prosecutor (KRS 15.700), the state's chief law enforcement officer (KRS 15.700), and the state's chief law officer (KRS 15.020). As the chief prosecutor, the Attorney General is the Chairman of the Kentucky Prosecutors Advisory Council, which supervises the prosecutors of Kentucky (KRS 15.700, KRS 15.705). As chief law officer, he writes opinions to advise government officials and agencies concerning the law. (KRS 15.020). The Attorney General holds an ex officio seat on various Kentucky state boards and agencies.
8a2f8bfe3f2ae8d60627552e2922ffff
Thornhill v. Alabama Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U.S. 88 (1940), was a United States Supreme Court case heard in 1938 and decided in 1940. It reversed the conviction of the president of a local union for violating an Alabama statute that prohibited only labor picketing. Thornhill was peaceably picketing his employer during an authorized strike when he was arrested and charged. In reaching its decision, Associate Justice Frank Murphy wrote for the Supreme Court that the free speech clause protects speech about the facts and circumstances of a labor dispute. The statute in the case prohibited all labor picketing, but "Thornhill" added peaceful labor picketing to the area protected by free speech.
8f7b9b08c337dcdb0de69e9158084bbe
Jackson v. Indiana Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 (1972) , was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that determined a U.S. state violated due process by involuntarily committing a criminal defendant for an indefinite period of time solely on the basis of his permanent incompetency to stand trial on the charges filed against him.
a57c88e0d7be07837c4798f424b52d38
Heath v. Alabama Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that, because of the doctrine of "dual sovereignty" (the concept that the United States and each state possess sovereignty – a consequence of federalism), the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution does not prohibit one state from prosecuting and punishing somebody for an act of which he had already been convicted of and sentenced for in another state.
479125e002b5c565edc5d55615d2ce90
Waller v. Florida Waller v. Florida, 397 U.S. 387 (1970), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the Double Jeopardy Clause protects defendants from successive prosecutions by states and municipalities for offenses based on the same criminal conduct.
e7be0887142967b72e05e309d9563259
Hudson v. McMillian Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992), is a United States Supreme Court decision where the Court on a 7-2 vote held that the use of excessive physical force against a prisoner may constitute cruel and unusual punishment even though the inmate does not suffer serious injury.
7586027c02e1faec5a8a4500371c91ee
Godfrey v. Georgia Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U.S. 420 (1980) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a death sentence could not be granted for a murder when the only aggravating factor was that the murder was found to be "outrageously or wantonly vile."
bf90f9a86c5c8842460aa34b3eeba39b
Lindsey v. Miller Lindsey v. Miller, 3 U.S. 411 (1799) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that: "The fact that the land demanded in a suit was granted by and is claimed under a State, does not make the State a party to the suit, within the meaning of the second section of the third article of the constitution. Nor does an issue upon the point whether the land demanded is within the limits of the State.