Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 20 of
20
with 100 items per page.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage abstract "Yes on Term Limits v. Savage (YOTL v. Savage) is a federal lawsuit challenging Oklahoma's residency requirements for petition circulators. On December 18, 2008, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a unanimous decision in the case, saying that Oklahoma's residency restriction is an unconstitutional violation of core First Amendment speech rights. The decision of the 10th Circuit overturns a lower federal court decision.,The 10th Circuit's decision in YOTL has attracted notice because: It is the third federal circuit court decision in 2008 that invalidates a state residency requirement. The Sixth Circuit said that Michigan's residency requirement is unconstitutional in Bogaert v. Land in August 2008 and the Ninth Circuit said that Arizona's residency requirement is unconstitutional in Nader v. Brewer in July 2008. The decision undercuts Drew Edmondson's rationale for criminally prosecuting the Oklahoma 3 for allegedly violating Oklahoma's residency requirement in a 2005 petition drive.,Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson has said that he plans to appeal the decision in YOTL to either the full 10th circuit or to the U.S. Supreme Court. His office says that they plan to continue their prosecution of Paul Jacob, Susan Johnson and Rick Carpenter. Earlier in 2008, Edmondson told Oklahoma City's Journal Record, "If the courts determine that the state's process violates the First Amendment, so be it. Until that time, our law will be enforced.",On January 21, 2009, the Tenth Circuit announced that it was rejecting Edmondson's request that it rehear the case. The state had asked for an en banc rehearing, but no judge wanted to rehear the case.Drew Edmondson then announced on January 22 that he was dropping his charges against Paul Jacob, Susan Johnson and Rick Carpenter for allegedly violating the unconstitutional law, saying that the 1969 law under which he was prosecuting them was "no longer enforceable".".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage wikiPageExternalLink termlimits-okla.pdf.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage wikiPageExternalLink Plaintiffs_Findings_of_Fact-Conclusions_of_Law.pdf.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage wikiPageID "21898163".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage wikiPageRevisionID "577793230".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage hasPhotoCollection Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage introrewrite "March 2009".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage primarysources "March 2009".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage weasel "March 2009".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage subject Category:2008_in_Oklahoma.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage subject Category:2008_in_United_States_case_law.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage subject Category:Oklahoma_law.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage subject Category:Politics_of_Oklahoma.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage comment "Yes on Term Limits v. Savage (YOTL v. Savage) is a federal lawsuit challenging Oklahoma's residency requirements for petition circulators. On December 18, 2008, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a unanimous decision in the case, saying that Oklahoma's residency restriction is an unconstitutional violation of core First Amendment speech rights.".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage label "Yes on Term Limits v. Savage".
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage sameAs m.05p9yhf.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage sameAs Q8052784.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage sameAs Q8052784.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage wasDerivedFrom Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage?oldid=577793230.
- Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage isPrimaryTopicOf Yes_on_Term_Limits_v._Savage.