Search for: "BATTLES v. STATE" Results 241 - 260 of 8,203
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Oct 2023, 3:24 pm by centerforartlaw
One such legal battle was seen in the state of North Carolina, in Soc’y for the Hist. [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 7:41 am by Kate Huddleston
HB4 is extreme anti-immigrant state legislation, and an extraordinary state arrogation of the exclusively federal power to regulate entry to and exit from the United States. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 7:06 pm
All of this makes  Reinvigorating the right to development: A vision for the future a fascinating read as well as a harbinger of the battles that will be fought--again pitting forces which view each other as incarnations of evil and themselves as good. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 2:26 am by INFORRM
On 13 October 2023, Mr Justice Julian Knowles handed down judgement in Aaronson v Stones [2023] EWHC 2399 (KB). [read post]
16 Oct 2023, 10:42 am by Eric Goldman
Substantial State Interest As usual, the court credits the state’s interest in protecting children’s privacy and physical/psychological well-being. [read post]
15 Oct 2023, 4:51 pm by INFORRM
  There was also a hearing in the case of Secretary of State for Defence v Persons Unknown. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
Two Families Got Fed Up with Their States’ Politics. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 8:12 am by jonathanturley
This year, the Supreme Court delivered a major victory for free speech in 303 Creative v. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 11:19 am by Rob Jordan
Barton “Buzz” Thompson served as special master for the United States Supreme Court in Montana v. [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 1:51 am by INFORRM
The Federal Court would make legal history in the defamation battle between Sydney MP Alex Greenwich and former NSW One Nation leader Mark Latham if it empanelled a jury to hear the case, the Sydney Morning Herald reports. [read post]
1 Oct 2023, 12:50 am by Florian Mueller
" On Thursday, the PTAB granted the petition and held all challenged claims unpatentable: Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd., v. [read post]