Veronika Rychlá

This case addresses whether the one-year time limit in Section 5110(b)(1) of U.S. Code, relating to the effective date of disability compensation to veterans, is subject to equitable tolling. The Supreme Court held that this provision is not subject to equitable tolling, maintaining the precise statutory framework

This case primarily dealt with the issue of standing in the context of immigration enforcement guidelines. The Supreme Court ruled that Texas and Louisiana lacked Article III standing to challenge the Department of Homeland Security's immigration enforcement guidelines. This decision underlines the principle that states cannot sue the federal government

Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. centers on the question of personal jurisdiction, specifically whether a company consents to jurisdiction in a state by registering to do business there. The key doctrine established is the affirmation of the principle that such registration constitutes consent to be sued in that state,

The Supreme Court case of Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc. v. Goldsmith revolved around the key doctrine of fair use in copyright law. The critical issue was whether the Andy Warhol Foundation's commercial use of Lynn Goldsmith's photograph in a derivative work was protected under the fair

This Supreme Court case focused on the intersection of free speech and anti-discrimination laws. The Court ruled that the First Amendment protects a website designer's right not to create content that contradicts their deeply held beliefs, in this case, related to same-sex marriage. This decision underscores the principle that freedom

The case Haaland v. Brackeen revolves around the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), a federal statute aimed at maintaining Indian children's connections with their Indian families in adoption and foster care proceedings. The key doctrine addresses the hierarchical preferences for placing Indian children under the ICWA and the associated legal

This case focused on the legality of race-based admissions programs at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina (UNC) under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The primary question was whether these prestigious institutions' admissions processes, which included consideration of applicants' race, were lawful. Introduction: STUDENTS FOR