Search for: "People v. Render"
Results 3141 - 3160
of 5,284
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jan 2014, 12:07 pm
On that view, the people ultimately get to decide what the Constitution means because they can amend the Constitution however they want pursuant to Article V (as long as they don’t interfere with equal suffrage in the Senate). [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 7:11 pm
Related Cases: Jewel v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 1:28 pm
Indeed, standing alone, the documents shed no light on defendant's guilt or innocence as ruled in People v Damato and People v Bush. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 2:11 pm
(Citing Baird v. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm
Silicon Valley billionaire investor Tim Draper recently unveiled a plan to divide up California into six separate states because, in his view, “California’s diverse population and economies [have] rendered the state nearly ungovernable. [read post]
1 Jan 2014, 2:24 pm
The government's explanation for this exemption is, in effect, that because such employers typically can and do prefer to hire employees who are coreligionists who can be assumed to share the churches' religious commitments, such employees are less likely to wish to purchase birth control: "[H]ouses of worship and their integrated auxiliaries that object to contraceptive coverage on religious grounds are more likely than other employers to employ people of the same faith… [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 9:57 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 2:37 pm
And yet, following the DC Circuit's decision in United States v Maynard (which eventually became United States v Jones when it was decided by the Supreme Court), individual jurists and scholars have increasingly embraced a mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment, under which a discrete action (watching someone in public, seeking their phone records via a grand jury subpoena) becomes unconstitutional when government officials engage in that action too intensively and for too… [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 1:47 pm
As Mr Eadie points out, that is inevitably the case when policy is cast in broad terms, and it is well established that ‘bright line’ rules are necessarily to some degree arbitrary but that does not render them disproportionate. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 1:47 pm
As Mr Eadie points out, that is inevitably the case when policy is cast in broad terms, and it is well established that ‘bright line’ rules are necessarily to some degree arbitrary but that does not render them disproportionate. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 1:27 pm
__________ The Case Opinion:Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 11:21 am
Similarly, in Doe v. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 8:07 am
In last week’s case (Bodeux v. [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 2:16 pm
Moore v. [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 5:14 am
The landmark Alexander Van Horn v. [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 3:05 am
I then zoom in even further to the intra‐national differences in some federal nations, such as Canada and Australia, where this situation is often linked to the overrepresentation of Indigenous people and the consequences of colonialism. [read post]
15 Dec 2013, 2:21 pm
The missing reference is John Vallamattom v. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 8:39 pm
Williams State v. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 2:36 am
” Many people receive such services through Medicare, or Medicaid, or by purchasing a plan (often with substantial government subsidies) on a government-run “exchange. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 11:43 am
Recently, the New Jersey Appellate Division rendered a short unreported decision (non-precedential) in Brucia v. [read post]
