Search for: "Blake v. United States"
Results 261 - 280
of 462
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Dec 2010, 7:00 am
On Friday, the President signed a law to replace the statute struck down by the Court as overbroad in United States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 11:12 pm
Blakely v. [read post]
27 Oct 2019, 9:02 pm
The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) is a federal agency that seeks to improve the administrative processes of the federal government. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 12:20 pm
See United States v. [read post]
7 Jun 2008, 2:56 am
Maryland and United States v. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 7:56 am
" United States v. [read post]
22 Jun 2007, 5:57 am
" United States v. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 1:30 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 4:15 pm
On January 3, 2020, Axon Enterprises Inc. filed a complaint against the Federal Trade Commission in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona challenging the constitutionality of the FTC’s administrative process. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 3:48 am
United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 8:52 am
United States Army Corps of Engineers - 3/23/15. [read post]
27 Oct 2014, 7:00 am
Blake B. [read post]
10 Nov 2010, 7:33 am
@font-face { font-family: "Arial"; }@font-face { font-family: "Cambria"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; } As I assume everyone knows, courts in the United States use the exclusionary rule to enforce the 4th Amendment. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 6:38 am
In United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 4:15 pm
App. 2016) (adverse possession and condemnation) Blake v. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 12:02 pm
Meza, in the California Court of Appeal, and United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2018, 6:34 am
See United States v. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 8:17 am
United States, 70 Fed. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 8:17 am
United States, 70 Fed. [read post]
12 May 2010, 9:27 am
Concurring Opinions addresses Kagan’s scholarly record as well, arguing that, although it may be “modest,” it is “simply irrelevant to the question of her qualifications to serve as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
