Search for: "GROOMS v. STATE"
Results 281 - 300
of 401
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jan 2011, 6:44 am
§ 2000cc et seq., to require only a minimal showing that a prison grooming rule which concededly imposes a substantial burden on religious exercise is the “least restrictive means of furthering [a] compelling governmental interest. [read post]
11 Feb 2022, 2:14 pm
From Markowski v. [read post]
22 Jul 2016, 9:44 am
In general, it requires reasonable accommodation of employees’ religious grooming and practices, unless accommodation would impose an “undue hardship. [read post]
15 Nov 2022, 9:01 pm
If a state were to pass a law today saying that, say, its governor will decide which slate of electors will represent the state in the Electoral College every four years, that law would not violate the United States Constitution.Now, however, such laws have no prospect of being passed in enough states to guarantee a Republican win in 2024. [read post]
26 May 2009, 5:02 am
In Lord Osunfarian Xodus v. [read post]
2 Sep 2014, 5:11 am
In Davis v. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 6:14 am
As explained above, any sex-specific dress or grooming policy, like any other sex-based classification, must be substantially related to an important governmental objective. [read post]
9 Oct 2022, 7:01 am
Shamima Begum, a notorious Islamic State female fighter who traveled to join the group in Syria at age 15, has for instance made frequent claims of self-defense, asserting that she was “groomed” into joining the Islamic State in 2015. [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 9:01 pm
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in 303 Creative LLC v. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 12:01 pm
* Andonissamy v. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 2:05 am
Supreme Court clarified this standard in Groff v. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 3:52 am
Mr Schofield was awarded £90,000 for an article published by the defendant’s which contained various defamatory and false allegations, including that Mr Schofield was involved in grooming children and/or young people. [read post]
1 Jul 2009, 12:08 pm
Glenn v. [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 3:08 pm
Title: Placer Dome, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 11:55 am
While the law states it is confirming existing law, rather than creating new law, employers need to ensure their practices comply with AB 5’s rules. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 12:47 pm
The case, Apple v. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 11:58 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 7:28 am
State v. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 12:48 pm
We approach Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 1:48 am
Humphreys J stated that there had been “no debate around the issue of the public interest, relevant to the anonymity of suspects, nor any consideration of the need for a fair balance of rights. [read post]
