Search for: "State v. Anthony M. S." Results 261 - 280 of 1,430
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jun 2018, 4:05 pm by Eugene Volokh
But I think that's not right as a matter of Free Exercise Clause precedent, which (at least as the Court interpreted it in Employment Division v. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 4:23 am by Edith Roberts
United States by an equally divided court, with Justice Anthony Kennedy recused, for this blog. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 9:58 am by Lyle Denniston
The public must now await the development of the next case, or cases, to see if the Justices will elaborate further or will, instead, leave the next exploration to lower courts based upon the few generalizations of law that did emerge in Monday’s main opinion, written by the Court’s most ardent defender of gay rights – Justice Anthony M. [read post]
22 May 2018, 10:33 am by Sandy Levinson
 Texas is one of those states that defines liberty in terms of "access to courts" to be able to set out one's claims. [read post]
22 May 2018, 4:31 am by Edith Roberts
Yesterday’s second opinion was in Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. [read post]
17 May 2018, 3:24 am by Lyle Denniston
But supporters of the fetal heartbeat approach to limiting abortion rights have grown more optimistic with the rising speculation that Justice Anthony M. [read post]
10 May 2018, 8:00 am by Sevens Legal
Inmates in those states should be given a chance to either be re-sentenced or argue for parole, according to Justice Anthony M. [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 2:33 pm by Ronald Mann
When the justices started their last week of arguments this morning with Lucia v. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 2:59 pm by Lyle Denniston
”) A few years ago, the states got their hopes up when Justice Anthony M. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 7:04 am by Howard Bashman
Roberts, Jr. issued a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Anthony M. [read post]
4 Apr 2018, 4:29 am by Edith Roberts
Constitution Daily reports that “[o]ne of the most-significant cases of the Supreme Court’s current term,” United States v. [read post]