Search for: "State v. Barrett"
Results 201 - 220
of 1,920
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Nov 2021, 9:38 am
In July, Kavanaugh and Barrett joined the court’s leftist majority in declining to hear Arlene’s Flowers v. [read post]
20 Mar 2022, 1:42 pm
And, of course, Feldman offers heaps of praise on Justice Barrett who did not join her "radical" colleagues. [read post]
17 Feb 2011, 3:26 pm
” Crespo v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 6:42 am
In Barrett v. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 4:21 pm
Nance v. [read post]
7 Feb 2025, 4:00 am
The Court in United States v. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 4:08 am
Meanwhile, across the street from the Capitol, the Supreme Court is closed Monday for Columbus Day, but the justices will resume their second week of oral arguments on Tuesday with arguments in United States v. [read post]
6 Feb 2008, 6:28 am
Barrett, 102 Ga. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 5:17 am
" But then in House v. [read post]
19 Apr 2023, 8:02 am
United States, in which Gorsuch wrote the majority and Justice Barrett wrote the dissent. [read post]
1 Jun 2022, 11:49 am
–NetChoice v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 12:29 pm
I am doubtful that Justice Barrett would have joined United States v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 12:47 pm
(BARRETT, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment). [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 5:42 am
”[5] In Bush v. [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 5:42 am
”[5] In Bush v. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 7:01 am
Barrett’s Jackson List, “Professor Meares’s lecture, entitled “Policing and Its Reform in the 21st Century,” addressed recent and historical United States events (including, beginning at 29:20, the Supreme Court’s June 20th decision in Utah v. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 7:03 am
United States, No. 23-726. [read post]
15 May 2023, 3:55 am
Section V reviews an anti-bribery statute enacted by the first Congress. [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 5:00 am
And amid all of that activity, the court heard oral arguments in United States v. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 12:20 pm
Neither Wisconsin nor the United States has introduced data sufficient to show that disarming all nonviolent felons substantially advances its interest in keeping the public safe. [read post]
