Search for: "State v. Baker"
Results 2341 - 2360
of 3,229
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2019, 9:27 am
Rohrmoos Venture v. [read post]
13 Jan 2019, 6:16 am
The Supreme Court has often affirmed, many times since United States v. [read post]
3 Jan 2024, 4:00 am
Instead, it was a statement by James Baker, then a spokesman for Republican presidential candidate George W. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 8:12 am
And while the Sunflower State won big this week in Kansas v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 4:18 am
In Ortiz v. [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 3:58 am
Sellers, which asks when a federal court should “look through” a summary state-court ruling to review the last reasoned state-court decision. [read post]
29 Jan 2008, 10:35 am
State of Indiana (NFP) Felipe Romero v. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 12:34 pm
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Carpenter v. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 8:13 am
The seminal case of Delaney v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 8:10 am
Delaney v. [read post]
15 Jun 2007, 2:20 pm
Scott Nelson has this post at the Consumer Law & Policy Blog about the Court's unanimous decision in Watson v. [read post]
25 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
The topic of malapportionment is well-trodden ground, with established measures borne both of legal necessity following Baker v. [read post]
3 Jan 2022, 5:30 am
In Tandon v. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 10:53 am
State of Indiana (NFP) C.G. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2008, 9:40 pm
United States v. [read post]
24 Feb 2019, 4:23 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 3:09 pm
It remains one of only three decisions in federal trial courts to uphold a ban, but the judges in the other two did not address the issue directly, finding that they had no authority to consider the issue because they were bound by a one-line Supreme Court decision in 1972 (Baker v. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 9:49 am
Baker, et al., 137 S. [read post]
9 Nov 2017, 6:38 am
Additional Resources: Vermont v. [read post]
4 Dec 2017, 8:48 am
The Justices on Tuesday will be hearing a major new case on state power to protect same-sex couples from discrimination when they seek goods or services in the marketplace – there, the dispute is over a retail baker’s refusal for religious reasons to create a cake for a gay wedding reception. [read post]
