Search for: "United States v. Commanding General"
Results 1 - 20
of 2,200
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 May 2024, 1:07 pm
In particular, we have to distinguish specific questions of original meaning from more general—and, here, more relevant—questions of original law: that is, the law of the United States as it stood at the Founding, and as it's been lawfully changed to the present day. [read post]
12 May 2024, 1:42 pm
VILER, Appellants, v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 5:01 am
Elrod v. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 8:37 am
United States, which concerned whether presidents have criminal "immunity" for their official acts while in office. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 5:41 am
And in Prosecutor v. [read post]
27 Apr 2024, 2:40 pm
Moreover, at least three important precedents--United States v. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 4:12 pm
United States. [read post]
23 Apr 2024, 1:32 pm
United States and Idaho v. [read post]
23 Apr 2024, 11:53 am
United States on jurisdictional grounds is a far better way of deciding Trump v. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 5:29 am
For example, in SEC v. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 4:00 am
Justice Kagan argued the case when she was the United States Solicitor General and after the Court held it over for re-argument (so that the conservatives could effectively rewrite the questions presented). [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:19 am
Within these techno-bureaucracies administrators articulate norms and objectives which are translated by coders into generative systems that then undertake their development and application. [read post]
1 Apr 2024, 6:48 pm
That's contrary to the Supreme Court's decision in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Apr 2024, 11:55 am
Ct. 2183, 2192 (2020); United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 7:28 pm
-NAP exhibits all of the weaknesses and missed opportunities that has marked the NAP process for many developed states: it focuses on outward conduct and pays little attention to the human rights effects of economic activity within the United States; it is grounded in the prerogatives of executive command; it provides little assessment of the legal and remedial framework of the United States and its relationship to managing business conduct; and… [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 10:49 am
The law made its way to the courts in a dispute as to whether British limitation law or United States law would apply to the claims. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 4:57 am
The United States had urged a “fair” legal process in the case, which government critics have said is aimed at sidelining an opponent in the runup to India’s general elections in April and May. [read post]
21 Mar 2024, 5:02 am
Central Command. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 2:04 pm
The majority’s misinterpretation of the exemption renders the statute in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as the Wisconsin Constitution. [read post]
The Supreme Court Cannot Ignore the National Security Implications of the So-Called ‘Jawboning’ Case
17 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
These efforts increase political polarization, sow discord, generate mistrust in governments and institutions, and undermine the national security of the United States. [read post]
