0
What else can I help you with?
Who wrote majority opinion in Oregon v Mitchell 1970?
I did.....
What was the purpose of the muller v oregon case?
protect women rights
Which case stands as a precedent that police may disperse a demonstration to keep the peace?
DeJonge v. Oregon
When was Irving Mitchell born?
Irving Mitchell was born on March 18, 1891, in Portland, Oregon, USA.
When was Rhea Mitchell born?
Rhea Mitchell was born on December 10, 1890, in Portland, Oregon, USA.
What college did NFL player Terrance Mitchell play for?
NFL player Terrance Mitchell played for Oregon.
Who won Oregon v smith?
For this case smith did not win, the peyote drug or called San Pedro was considered an illegal drug in Oregon. About a decade later Oregon changed their laws giving special privileges to religious land owners.
The 1908 case of Muller v State of Oregon was the precedent setting in that the supreme court?
The 1908 Case Of Muller Vs. State Of Orgeon Was Precedent Setting In That The Supreme Court
What has the author Suzie Mitchell written?
Suzie Mitchell has written: 'Parental involvement in case conferences'
The Oregon case 1925 is significant in that it?
The Oregon Case of 1925 guaranteed the right of private schools. The Oregon legislature passed a law that required all children to attend public schools.
In the 1908 case of Muller v State of Oregon the supreme court ruled that since women were different from men?
it was constitutional for a state to pass legislation that gave women special protection in the workplace
What was 1 supreme court case on the 26Th amendment?
One significant Supreme Court case related to the 26th Amendment is Oregon v. Mitchell (1970). In this case, the Court addressed the constitutionality of a provision of the Voting Rights Act that lowered the voting age to 18 in federal, state, and local elections. The Court upheld the amendment's application to federal elections but ruled that states could set their own voting ages for state and local elections, leading to a complex landscape regarding voting rights. This case highlighted the ongoing tensions between federal and state authority in election laws.
