11 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 254,855 times 279 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Marks v. United States
430 U.S. 188 (1977) Cited 2,103 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding that due process is violated if the trial court instructs the jury based on the current interpretation of a statute, rather than the interpretation that controlled at the time of the allegedly criminal acts
Swanson v. Citibank
614 F.3d 400 (7th Cir. 2010) Cited 2,016 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding plaintiff stated a claim under § 3605
Nichols v. United States
511 U.S. 738 (1994) Cited 710 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that due process does not require a defendant to be warned that his conviction might be used for enhancement purposes if he is later convicted of another crime
Vieth v. Jubelirer
541 U.S. 267 (2004) Cited 345 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding political gerrymandering claims nonjusticiable based on the lack of workable standards
League v. Perry
548 U.S. 399 (2006) Cited 275 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that political gerrymandering is unconstitutional
Morrison v. YTB Int'l, Inc.
649 F.3d 533 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 182 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state law's limit to in-state events is an "application of choice-of-law principles has nothing to do with standing"
Aaron v. Mahl
550 F.3d 659 (7th Cir. 2008) Cited 115 times
Adopting the “normal course of business” exception
U.S. v. Johnson
467 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2006) Cited 56 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding United States may assert jurisdiction over wetlands in question provided either "continuous surface connection" or "significant nexus" standard is met
Gonzalez v. City of Aurora
535 F.3d 594 (7th Cir. 2008) Cited 12 times
Concluding that no evidence was provided that voting opportunities for Hispanics in a municipality were impaired, the plaintiff did not "build ... a factual record," and no VRA claim lay despite Hispanics being dramatically less represented as a portion of their population
Section 2284 - Three-judge court; when required; composition; procedure
28 U.S.C. § 2284 Cited 1,790 times 4 Legal Analyses
Providing for the convention of such a court whenever an action is filed challenging the constitutionality of apportionment of legislative districts

Committee For A Fair And Balanced Map et al v. Illinois State Board of Elections et al

11 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that due process is violated if the trial court instructs the jury based on the current interpretation of a statute, rather than the interpretation that controlled at the time of the allegedly criminal acts

Holding plaintiff stated a claim under § 3605

Holding that due process does not require a defendant to be warned that his conviction might be used for enhancement purposes if he is later convicted of another crime

Holding political gerrymandering claims nonjusticiable based on the lack of workable standards

Holding that political gerrymandering is unconstitutional

Holding that a state law's limit to in-state events is an "application of choice-of-law principles has nothing to do with standing"

Adopting the “normal course of business” exception

Holding United States may assert jurisdiction over wetlands in question provided either "continuous surface connection" or "significant nexus" standard is met

Concluding that no evidence was provided that voting opportunities for Hispanics in a municipality were impaired, the plaintiff did not "build ... a factual record," and no VRA claim lay despite Hispanics being dramatically less represented as a portion of their population

Providing for the convention of such a court whenever an action is filed challenging the constitutionality of apportionment of legislative districts