Search for: "Supreme People's Court Observer" Results 2461 - 2480 of 2,743
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Dec 2007, 8:00 pm
Highlights this week included: talk of Thailand's potential move to compulsory licences for anticancer drugs, Canada's DMCA put off until '08 and China's retialiatory blockade of Hollywood films. [read post]
23 Oct 2011, 10:36 am by Jasmine Joseph
While the Mississippi Supreme Court might disagree with DeShaney v. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 9:00 pm
Thanks to BC law school's Eagle and ABA's website for reporting on this story. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 5:36 am by Gritsforbreakfast
Cook’s guilt, I believe I have a few observations I can offer to the discussion. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 8:14 am by Josh Blackman
At the time, a newspaper from Staunton, Virginia observed that Underwood's judgment was "immediately" appealed, observing that "we feel certain [it] will be reversed. [read post]
15 Jan 2010, 3:32 am
Given the Mongolia's extraordinary level of secrecy regarding its death penalty system -- where event the method of execution was considered a 'state secret' -- the moratorium, and the speech itself, is highly significant. [read post]
31 Mar 2012, 9:14 am by Angelo A. Paparelli
At the same time, bloggers, Tweeple and cable-TV bloviators could not stop talking about the separate comments of a current member of the Supreme Court and of a former judge. [read post]
29 Jun 2007, 7:05 am
" Someone give that guy a newspaper;Courts mean nothing without a judge...and since New York's judges have now gone 9 years without even a cost-of-living pay raise, so our Chief Judge has threatened a lawsuit. [read post]
24 Apr 2022, 12:48 pm by Ilya Somin
"Supreme Court Ruling on Travel Ban Ignores Religious Discrimination," USA Today, June 26, 2018. [read post]
31 Mar 2025, 6:58 am by Dan Bressler
” “President Donald Trump’s crackdown on lawyers is having a chilling effect on his opponents’ ability to defend themselves or challenge his actions in court, according to people who say they are struggling to find legal representation as a result of his challenges. [read post]
28 Sep 2022, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
And it rejected defendant's "neutral report" defense: The parties dispute whether the Neutral Report doctrine will apply in this Court. [read post]
13 Jul 2022, 4:03 pm by Eugene Volokh
" Indeed, "no Supreme Court case supports the destruction of government, or another's, property on free exercise grounds. [read post]
21 Oct 2012, 9:46 am by Lawrence Taylor
There’s nothing that can be done about it, so says the California Supreme Court. [read post]
17 Jan 2025, 6:37 pm
(Supreme Court Upholds TikTok Shutdown)The per curiam's holding is actually the least interesting part of the opinion. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 7:31 am by Max Kennerly, Esq.
The antitrust analysis for "Search Plus Your World" is the same as for the Chrome SEO penalty, because it would also be alleged to be 'exclusionary conduct.' Did Google make that change as part of, in the Supreme Court's words, "the willful acquisition or maintenance of that power as distinguished from growth or development as a consequence of a superior product, business acumen, or historic accident? [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 12:08 pm by Michelle Yeary
  Often this is just to observe the use of the company’s product, but sometimes the sales rep can “assist” the medical team by making sure the right product is available, helping nurses locate the proper instruments, or calibrating a product before use. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 2:59 pm by Josh Blackman
(After the silent Justice Thomas, Sotomayor usually garners the fewest laugh lines at the Supreme Court.) [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 12:21 pm by Rachel Myers, ACLU
In November, Caddo Parish commissioners voted 11-1 to take it down, after litigation charging racial bias in several death penalty cases argued under the flag got the attention of the Louisiana Supreme Court and the national media. [read post]
26 May 2007, 10:32 pm
A list of such acts falling under S.295A as Mr.Dilip suggests, may be an answer to limit the discretion of the courts which may be carried away by the ‘disturbance to law and order' argument. [read post]