Search for: "People v Trump" Results 2941 - 2960 of 4,657
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Feb 2025, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
" Congress, then, has authorized both denying visas to people based on their speech endorsing a wide range of violence, and deporting based on such speech people who had already been admitted. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 5:30 am by SHG
On the 50th Anniversary of Gideon v. [read post]
25 May 2022, 4:00 am by Sherry F. Colb
ColbIn his draft opinion for the Supreme Court in Dobbs v. [read post]
14 Nov 2020, 1:58 pm by Sandy Levinson
Trump, to follow even minimal guidelines like wearing masks and maintaining social distance).As already suggested, though, by reference to the title of my course, the real problem is whether badly needed constitutional reform is "possible" as well as desirable. [read post]
1 Jul 2016, 9:20 am
An exception is Waits v Frito Lay, 978 F. 2d 1093 (9thCir. 1992). [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 8:54 am by Neil H. Buchanan
  (Weirdly, people who criticize academia love the word ensconce.) [read post]
3 Dec 2024, 5:31 am by Elizabeth Goitein
President-elect Donald Trump has promised to carry out the largest deportation operation in American history. [read post]
6 Dec 2020, 4:45 pm by INFORRM
 The company says it will now make changes to the service, which lets IT administrators “help their people get the most” from its products, in order to limit the amount of information about individual employees that is shared with managers. [read post]
7 Aug 2010, 7:46 pm by Rick
Assuming it passes, Proposition 19, being the newer law, trumps 11357 on this issue. [read post]
16 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
However, few people bother to litigate when the law is clearly against them. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 7:18 am
The Passions: A Study of Human Nature (John Wiley & Sons, 2018)Harris, William V. [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 2:04 pm by Sandy Levinson
 With respect, try telling that first to Eugene V. [read post]
12 Jun 2025, 10:06 pm by David Super
  This raises a host of constitutional questions:  among other things, it is very much “a gun to the head” of the kind the Supreme Court held unconstitutional in NFIB v. [read post]