Search for: "United States v. Anthony May" Results 281 - 300 of 1,553
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Section One straightforwardly provides: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Moving beyond the bare text, it is important, even (maybe especially) a hundred years later, to think more about what the Amendment really sought to constitutionally accomplish, and how its full import has not been deeply understood. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 8:09 am by sydniemery
United States is cited in the following article: Anna Roberts, Arrests as Guilt, 70 Ala. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 2:17 pm by Erik J. Heels
Both patent law and trademark law are administered by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). [read post]
21 May 2019, 3:51 am by Edith Roberts
At Bloomberg Law, Kimberly Robinson reports that “[r]etired Justice Anthony Kennedy lamented the state of civic discourse May 20 while speaking to a room full of prominent attorneys and judges. [read post]
9 May 2019, 12:06 pm by Anthony Carbone, PC
In case you’re unfamiliar with this terminology, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Missouri v. [read post]
You may have heard the expression that “a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 12:17 pm by Rachael Hanna
With respect to the applicability of the Constitution, Dixon cited Justice Anthony Kennedy’s concurring opinion in United States v. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 7:05 am by Ronald Collins
United States (2000), Rehnquist declined to expressly overrule Miranda v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 8:50 am by Leah Litman
Next Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear argument in United States v. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 6:00 am by Sandy Levinson
”  One might compare this, ruefully, with the fact that not only Holder, but also his boss, the former President of the Harvard Law Review and a former member of the University of Chicago Law School faculty, never once offered an interesting observation about the United States Constitution and the vision presumably underlying it nor indicated any deep interest in molding the federal judiciary through judicial appointments. [read post]