Search for: "The Active v. United States" Results 301 - 320 of 18,150
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jul 2009, 1:37 pm
As was recently reported on this blog, this past May the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Ashcroft v. [read post]
19 Dec 2008, 1:23 am
Robin Kundis Craig (Florida State University - College of Law) has posted The Military and the Environment in the United States: Exemptions, Injunctions, and Winter v. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 9:23 am
As explained by the Appeals Court, this case involves procedural challenges to a United States Forest Service Rule known as the "State Petitions Rule. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 4:47 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
The second involves the interception of Internet-based communications and is targeted at foreigners who are not within the United States, but may also inadvertently acquire the communications of U.S. persons. [read post]
10 Sep 2020, 3:00 pm
  Sure, we take away some of these rights during their active institutionalization. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 11:26 am
Active involvement with the Court's Assembly of States Parties; ? [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 5:08 pm by Zachary Spilman
On Monday, CAAF released it’s fourth opinion of the term in United States v. [read post]
  However, the union claimed that decades of NLRB case law was unconstitutional and that its activity was protected as free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution pursuant to Reed v. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 5:17 pm by Eugene Volokh
Attorney General, the Montana Supreme Court upheld a ban on corporate expenditures to speak in support of or opposition to political candidates — pretty much the same sort of ban that the United States Supreme Court struck down in Citizens United v. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 10:00 am by Zachary Spilman
The two active petitions for certiorari in military justice cases (United States v. [read post]
28 Sep 2023, 4:00 am by Anil Kalhan
Ultimately, of course, the Supreme Court vacated the Trump administration’s rescission of DACA in 2020 when—by a 5-4 margin, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority—it decided Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]