Search for: "State v. Race" Results 3001 - 3020 of 8,680
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Apr 2008, 5:08 pm
Or, more accurately, does the United States, in particular, have jurisdiction to punish pirates for offenses committed on the high seas? [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 2:00 pm
  Finally, for the reasons stated above, and as shown by its legislative history, § 2000e-2(l) prohibits the City’s action. ... [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 8:48 pm by Transplanted Lawyer
Buono is akin to the mess that was made of race discrimination law after Bakke v. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 5:22 am
Even at that time, only a handful of states banned interracial marriage.The Court also rejected the specious assertion -- which Bardwell has also made -- that banning interracial marriage did not discriminate on the basis of race because neither blacks nor whites could marry outside of their race. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 3:04 am by Amy Howe
  In Dollar General Stores v. [read post]
30 May 2018, 4:36 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
• Policy considerations and implications in United States v. [read post]
3 May 2012, 1:17 pm by Steve Hall
Ohio State University Professor Michelle Alexander told me it was the Plessy v Ferguson of our time, referencing the 1896 decision to justify racial segregation. [read post]
1 May 2024, 4:00 am by Eric Segall
Board of Education for the proposition that “the Fourteenth Amendment prevents states from according differential treatment to American children on the basis of their color or race. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 9:11 pm by Prof. Akhil Reed Amar, guest-blogging
Akhil Reed Amar, guest-blogging) In a recent posting, Ilya Somin says the following: “Beginning with the famous case of Bolling v. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 2:59 pm by Kenneth J. Vanko
--Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of New YorkOpinion Date: 10/22/10Cite: The Ayco Co., L.P. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2025, 3:43 am by SHG
In the 1971 case of Griggs v. [read post]
12 Jun 2018, 7:15 am by John Elwood
United States, 17-7177 Issue: Whether, when a criminal defendant has already been convicted of an offense in a state criminal proceeding, the United States may thereafter prosecute the defendant for the same offense without violating the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on double jeopardy. [read post]