Search for: "United States v. Paul" Results 3021 - 3040 of 4,493
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Mar 2015, 12:42 am by INFORRM
It is reported that 90% of voters in the United States support the right to delete links to personal information. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 1:41 am by INFORRM
Data Privacy and Data Protection The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology Michelle Donelan has refuted a reported pause on consideration of the proposed Data Protection and Digital Information Bill. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 7:07 am
Some tragedies just haunt you forever.Given that the only possible enforcement for Vienna violations would be action by the United Nations Security Council, in which the United States has a veto, it's hard to predict what will happen going forward. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:50 am by John Elwood
United States, involving whether juries must make the determination whether qualifying predicate offenses “were committed on occasions different from one another” under the Armed Career Criminal Act sentencing enhancement scheme. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 10:00 am by Eugene Volokh
United States, 485 F.2d 1087, 1097 (8th Cir. 1973) (voiding as vague statute punishing "libelous, scurrilous, defamatory words" written on the outside of an envelope"). [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 10:47 am by Jamelle C. Sharpe
Yaira Dubin, assistant to the solicitor general, argues for the United States. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 11:46 am by LII Team
”Lea V., law professor emerita  “I’m very grateful to Cornell LII and its tireless staff for providing free and up-to-date access to the United States Code and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence, plus its US Supreme Court advance sheets provided under its Hermes Project. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 5:12 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee dismissed plaintiffs’ claims as time-barred. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 1:42 pm by Lyle Denniston
  “Although the United States agrees with [Davis] that the question presented is an important and recurring one on which there is a conflict among the courts of appeals and state supreme courts, this case is not a good vehicle to resolve that question,” the Department argued. [read post]