Search for: "United States v. Young" Results 241 - 260 of 4,000
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jan 2023, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Krauss, New Light on the History of Free Exercise Exemptions: The Debates in Two Eighteenth-Century State Legislatures, (Catholic University Law Review, Vol. 71, No. 4, 2022).Luke Boso, Religious Liberty, Discriminatory Intent, and the Status Quo Constitution, (Univ. of San Francisco Law Research Paper , Jan. 2023).Enrico Bonadio, Krishna Ravi Srinivas, Balaji Parthasarathy Iyengar & Atreya Choudhary, Gandhian Philosophy and Indian Intellectual Property, (in Relevance of… [read post]
16 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism 139, 142 (Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. [read post]
8 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
” I have no particular brief for high Federalists from New England, but I do wonder what we might think had Garrison actually been influential and several New England states accepted his view and tried to secede, say, after the Supreme Court’s decision in Prigg v. [read post]
3 Jan 2023, 5:00 am by Timothy Bonis
Michael Young cites the Court’s 1995 ruling in United States v. [read post]
31 Dec 2022, 4:29 am by jonathanturley
On December 30, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit handed down a major opinion in in Adams v. [read post]
19 Dec 2022, 2:31 am by INFORRM
The Editors Code of Practice, which is enforced by IPSO, states that corrections must be published “with due prominence. [read post]
16 Dec 2022, 3:38 am by Chris Seaton
The United States records one million COVID deaths. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 2:46 pm by Eugene Volokh
Hart (Pa. 2011) (holding that "an attempt to lure … does not occur upon the mere offer of a ride in a motor vehicle to a child, but, rather, involves only situations where a child is provided a further enticement or inducement to enter the vehicle"); United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 8:37 am by Michael Oykhman
This conduct can include publicly disobeying a court order (United Nurses of Alberta v Alberta (Attorney General), 1992 CanLII 99 (SCC)) R v Devost, 2010 ONCA 459 (CanLII) also stated that the identity of the accused as well as the date and time of their prohibited conduct must be confirmed (at para 34). [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 8:37 am by Eric Goldman
The court concludes: Whether it is wise for members of the United States Congress to block critical constituents from their social-media accounts is not for a court to say. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
The monograph ran with the basic idea that our nation, the United States, has a “civil religion” organized around the Constitution, and that this is a faith to which we must all choose to subscribe. [read post]