Search for: "United States v. State of Ala." Results 221 - 240 of 930
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2019, 1:02 pm by Steve Lubet
As Pelosi put it, Legitimate criticism of Israel’s policies is protected by the values of free speech and democratic debate that the United States and Israel share. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 1:05 pm by John K. Ross
" On Wednesday, the Supreme Court held a spirited oral argument for Tennessee Wine & Spirits Retailers Association v. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 10:08 am by Guest Blogger
  In response, the State of Wyoming argued—as it had successfully below—that the dispute was squarely governed by the Court’s decision in Ward v. [read post]
24 Oct 2018, 4:33 pm by Kevin LaCroix
John Reed Stark Most readers are undoubtedly familiar with the concept of “insider trading” – that is, the purchase or sale by company insiders of their personal holdings in company shares based on material non-public information. [read post]
23 Oct 2018, 6:00 am by Sandy Levinson
 So much, incidentally, for the Lincolnian theory that the United States had been a singular entity since 1774, let alone the Declaration of Independence in 1776--the four-score-and-seven-years prior to 1776. [read post]
5 Oct 2018, 1:30 pm by John K. Ross
United States, which presents the Court with a chance to reconsider. [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 5:32 pm by Angelo A. Paparelli
Volpe, 401 US 402, 415 (1971) (decision of the Secretary of Transportation comes with a “presumption of regularity” concerning “the official acts of public officers and, in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts presume that they have properly discharged their official duties”), and United States v. [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 5:32 pm by Angelo A. Paparelli
Volpe, 401 US 402, 415 (1971) (decision of the Secretary of Transportation comes with a “presumption of regularity” concerning “the official acts of public officers and, in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts presume that they have properly discharged their official duties”), and United States v. [read post]