Search for: "United States v. Stanford" Results 241 - 260 of 1,234
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jan 2009, 8:15 am
Stanford student Scott Noveck discusses oral argument in Kansas v. [read post]
7 May 2007, 3:51 pm
Following graduation, Sprigman clerked for the Honorable Stephen Reinhardt of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and for Justice Lourens H. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 3:51 pm
On June 21, 2004, I had the distinct honor of meeting one of my mentors after having been sworn in to the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
27 Nov 2006, 3:59 pm
Respondents also counter the standards proposed by petitioner and the United States. [read post]
18 Jul 2010, 6:16 am by Simon Chester
At a session at the Fourth International Legal Ethics Conference at Stanford Law School yesterday afternoon Freddy Mnyongani Senior Lecturer of the Jurisprudence Department at the University of South Africa told us that today has been marked by the United Nations as Mandela Day, in honour of the great man’s 92nd birthday. [read post]
12 Dec 2015, 6:01 pm by Gerard N. Magliocca
United States (the anti-commandeering principle)Clinton v. [read post]
16 Oct 2013, 10:19 am by Judy Selby
Corcino & Associates et al., CV 13-3728 GAF (JCx), United States District Court Central District (October 7, 2013). [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 6:30 am
  Stanford Law student Jess Oats discusses the case below. [read post]
2 Jun 2021, 9:41 pm by Eugene Volokh
It should not take outrage from Twitter and a United States Senator to protect political satire at any institution of higher education of any caliber. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 6:59 am
United States, and now Harbison v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 9:43 am
United States, Case No. 1:16-cv-00745-PLF, is pending in the U.S. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 7:19 am by Anna Christensen
United States to include the decision and a recap by Will Edelman, also from Stanford. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 12:34 pm
From an administrative law standpoint, this case is potentially significant because it could clarify the Court's demarcation in United States v. [read post]
9 Oct 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
            Despite the asymmetry between the two books, two concerns unite them that deserve critical treatment. [read post]