Search for: "A v. X, Y, and Z"
Results 1 - 20
of 299
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2024, 12:18 pm
I will turn to that case next week.]What do I think about Issue X, Y, or Z? [read post]
21 Apr 2024, 7:33 pm
Donald Trump illegally interfered with the election by doing X, Y, and Z. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 8:12 am
Bоnus vəsаitlərini gеri qаzаnmаq lаzım оlmаyасаq, çünki оnlаr təmin еdilmir. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 4:00 pm
Instead of paying the hospital $3,000 for the Company X claim, Insurer Z pays the hospital $2,000 and refunds Company Y’s plan $1,000. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 8:09 am
When Case X distinguishes Case Y, and then Case Z later quotes Y, that doesn't mean that X is no longer good law. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 11:16 am
The ban displaces the speech of TikTok users, so in that sense they can speak at X and Y but not Z. [read post]
25 Nov 2023, 6:32 am
Unfortunately, it’s not truly as “easy” as it might sound because “Falling Objects” can be defined in your policy, or policies can say “falling objects does not include [X, Y, Z],” or your policy can be completely silent on what “falling objects” even is. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 6:26 am
Pix Credit here My Administration places the highest urgency on governing the development and use of AI safely and responsibly, and is therefore advancing a coordinated, Federal Government-wide approach to doing so. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 1:52 am
On 6 October 2023, Collins Rice J handed down judgement defendant in the case of Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn v His Majesty Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbón y Borbón. [read post]
21 Aug 2023, 10:26 am
You can learn more about this from Justice Corrigan's opinion, but the easiest hypo is when you're trying to kill X and X is standing in a tight group of 10 people and you blast your Uzi into the group, killing not only X (who you wanted to kill) but also Y and Z. [read post]
4 Jul 2023, 4:32 pm
There (at [165]), the judge imagined a scenario where ‘X tells an assembly of people at a meeting that he has evidence that Y has murdered Z, his wife, who has been missing. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 6:00 am
One line of development relaxes various assumptions that Arrow made; for example, we might relax Arrow's assumption that the social ranking must be transitive (if X is preferred to Y and Y is preferred to Z, then X must be preferred to Z). [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 8:47 am
As I’ll show, United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2023, 5:50 am
(Editor’s Note: The authors share their insights on U.S. government classification and declassification process on the Just Security Podcast. [read post]
25 May 2023, 10:22 am
Rather, our core point is that if Congress authorizes the collection of taxes totaling X, borrowing totaling Y, and appropriations totaling Z > X + Y, then there's no way for the President to comply with all of the sets of laws. [read post]
30 Mar 2023, 4:05 pm
The point is this: if there's a statute that says that you're guilty if you do X in settings involving Y and Z, the state's required to prove each of X, Y and Z. [read post]
12 Mar 2023, 4:00 am
Il a été acquitté relativement à des infractions alléguées à l’endroit de Z, et un arrêt conditionnel des procédures a été prononcé sous des chefs de contacts sexuels à l’égard de X et Y. [read post]
21 Feb 2023, 3:30 am
Georgia 1.00% > $0 1.00% > $0 $5,400 $7,100 $2,700 $7,400 $3,000 2.00% > $750 2.00% > $1,000 3.00% > $2,250 3.00% > $3,000 4.00% > $3,750 4.00% > $5,000 5.00% > $5,250 5.00% > $7,000 5.75% > $7,000 5.75% > $10,000 Hawaii 1.40% > $0 1.40% > $0 $2,200… [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 4:30 am
Reaching the debt ceiling means that Congress has presented the President with three laws (or sets of laws) with which he cannot simultaneously comply: (1) Spend amount X. (2) Tax amount Y. (3) Borrow no more than Z, where X > Y + Z. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:15 am
(2) Behar v. [read post]
