Search for: "United States v. Steven Stands" Results 261 - 280 of 836
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Apr 2018, 4:26 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks how fully a judge must explain a sentencing modification. [read post]
2 Apr 2018, 4:07 am by Edith Roberts
” Additional coverage of the solicitor general’s motion in United States v. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 3:33 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks when erroneous applications of the U.S. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 6:52 am by Andrew Hamm
Securities and Exchange Commission, in which the court will consider whether administrative law judges of the SEC are officers of the United States within the meaning of the appointments clause. [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 3:55 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie discusses Trump v. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 4:20 am by Edith Roberts
” At the Cato Institute’s Cato at Liberty blog, Ilya Shapiro and others highlight the amicus brief the Institute has filed in United States v. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 4:17 pm by Kevin LaCroix
In its brief, United Policyholders stated that the D&O insurer’s “interpretation of the subject exclusion renders paid-for coverage illusory. [read post]
13 Dec 2017, 7:44 am by Robert Manchel
The federal courthouses are also considered united states courthouses. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 4:36 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Co-director of enforcement Stephanie Avakian touted the Cyber Unit’s second ICO enforcement action, stating: “We will continue to scrutinize the ICO market vigilantly for improper offerings that seek to sell securities to the general public without the required registration or exemption. [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 1:19 pm by ligitsec
105 S.Ct. 2218 85 L.Ed.2d 588 HARPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS, INC. and the Reader’s Digest Association, Inc., Petitionersv.NATION ENTERPRISES and the Nation Associates, Inc. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 10:15 am by Eugene Volokh
United States Post Office Dep’t (which holds “that nonconsensual one-to-one communications that impinge on the privacy rights of the recipient are not protected under the first amendment”). 6. [read post]
27 Oct 2017, 4:53 am by SHG
The First Circuit Court of Appeals decision in United States v. [read post]