National Organization for Women v. Scheidler: Difference between revisions
m Wikilink |
→top: Joseph Scheidler; 2 wikilinks |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
'''''[[National Organization for Women]] v. Scheidler''''', [[Case citation|510 U.S. 249]] (1994), is a [[Supreme Court of the United States|United States Supreme Court]] case in which the Court ruled that the [[Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act]] (RICO) could apply to enterprises without economic motives; pro-life protesters could thus be prosecuted under it. An organization without an economic motive can still affect interstate or foreign commerce and thus satisfy the Act's definition of a racketeering enterprise. |
'''''[[National Organization for Women]] v. Scheidler''''', [[Case citation|510 U.S. 249]] (1994), is a [[Supreme Court of the United States|United States Supreme Court]] case in which the Court ruled that the [[Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act]] (RICO) could apply to enterprises without economic motives; pro-life protesters could thus be prosecuted under it. An organization without an economic motive can still affect interstate or foreign commerce and thus satisfy the Act's definition of a racketeering enterprise. |
||
The Court did not issue judgment on whether or not the Pro-Life Action Network, the organization in question, had committed actions that could be prosecuted under RICO. |
The Court did not issue judgment on whether or not the [[Pro-Life Action Network]], the organization in question, had committed actions that could be prosecuted under RICO. |
||
[[G. Robert Blakey]] argued on behalf of Scheidler, while [[Miguel Estrada]] represented the United States as ''[[amicus curiae]]'' in favor of reversal. |
[[G. Robert Blakey]] argued on behalf of [[Joseph Scheidler]], while [[Miguel Estrada]] represented the United States as ''[[amicus curiae]]'' in favor of reversal. |
||
== External links == |
== External links == |
||
Revision as of 02:19, 30 November 2016
| National Organization for Women v. Scheidler | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 8, 1993 Decided January 24, 1994 | |
| Full case name | National Organization for Women, Inc., et al. v. Joseph Scheidler, et al. |
| Citations | 510 U.S. 249 (more) |
| Holding | |
| The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act applies to enterprises without economic motives, including anti-abortion protesters. Seventh Circuit reversed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by unanimous |
| Concurrence | Souter, joined by Kennedy |
| Laws applied | |
| 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) | |
National Organization for Women v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) could apply to enterprises without economic motives; pro-life protesters could thus be prosecuted under it. An organization without an economic motive can still affect interstate or foreign commerce and thus satisfy the Act's definition of a racketeering enterprise.
The Court did not issue judgment on whether or not the Pro-Life Action Network, the organization in question, had committed actions that could be prosecuted under RICO.
G. Robert Blakey argued on behalf of Joseph Scheidler, while Miguel Estrada represented the United States as amicus curiae in favor of reversal.
External links
 | This article relating to case law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |