Search for: "United States v. David Martin"
Results 261 - 280
of 471
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jan 2014, 5:55 am
“Many distinguished leaders in government, academia, science and business are Yale alumni, including three of the past four United States presidents. [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 12:46 pm
” In 2000, the Supreme Court of the United States in its decision in Troxel v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 8:00 am
” A new world was dawning in the United States as well, King said, thanks to the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown v. [read post]
29 Nov 2013, 4:32 pm
In United States v. [read post]
20 Nov 2013, 7:41 pm
That discussion is as possible within non-state governance units as it is within states. [read post]
14 Nov 2013, 1:04 pm
Simon.Stahl, Philip Michael.Chicago, Illinois : ABA Section of Family Law, [2013]KF547 .S733 2013 Family Law According to our hearts : Rhinelander v. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:50 pm
Dunne, Martin C. [read post]
17 Sep 2013, 5:02 pm
Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace.Minow, Martha. 1998. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 10:05 am
After all, we have one commander in chief at a time, and the United States is weakened if our presidency is weakened. [read post]
29 Aug 2013, 11:55 am
Supreme Court, in Powell v. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 9:01 pm
Yet patronymy was, and remains, dominant in the United States—at least for children born in wedlock. [read post]
16 Aug 2013, 10:36 am
“Many distinguished leaders in government, academia, science and business are Yale alumni, including three of the past four United States presidents. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 6:34 pm
David J.R. [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 8:05 am
Considered a "landmark case", Epperson v. [read post]
20 Jul 2013, 10:39 am
This paper considers societal constitutionalism in its dynamic element—as a system structures constant adjustment among the constituting elements of a governance unit (whether state, corporation, religion, etc.) [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 4:10 pm
Holder, this Term’s challenge to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Court held that Section 4 of the law, which identifies the state and local governments that are subject to the Act’s “preclearance” requirement, is unconstitutional based on “current conditions” in the United States. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 3:01 pm
United States, Career Advice, CATO Institute, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, Clarence Thomas, David Y. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 6:43 pm
Slip at 4, citing United States v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 5:29 am
United States, 597 F. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 7:30 am
United States. [read post]
