Search for: "U.S. v. Alli" Results 301 - 320 of 1,657
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Oct 2008, 7:43 pm
”   That is not limited, it said, solely to those who actually fought against the U.S. or its allies “in an armed conflict. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 9:15 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
United States, 137 U.S. 342, 346 (1890). [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 9:14 pm
The admission came despite controversy because of U.S. fears that the Soviet Union was "also utilizing captured German scientists for the same end," given the destructive success of German rockets like the "V-1 Flying Bomb" above left. [read post]
10 Oct 2015, 3:48 am by Elina Saxena
The European Court of Justice ruled against the Safe Harbor framework in Schrems v. [read post]
10 Mar 2021, 8:51 am by Peter Margulies, Ira Rubinstein
The July 2020 decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Data Protection Commissioner v. [read post]
15 Jun 2019, 6:01 am by Vishnu Kannan
As part of an ongoing debate about U.S. cyber strategy, Dan Efrony argued that U.S. and its allies’ highly ambiguous approach to law and policy in cyberspace undermines attempts to develop clear binding norms for state conduct. [read post]
27 May 2008, 12:44 am
Last week, in Minister of Justice v. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 3:19 pm by Lyle Denniston
NOTE TO READERS: Tuesday night, the blog published a post on the planned opening of a U.S. mainland prison to house some Guantanamo Bay prisoners, and discussed how that might impact the pending Supreme Court case, Kiyemba v. [read post]
19 Jan 2018, 11:38 am by Sarah Grant, Jack Goldsmith
Pursuant to the 2001 AUMF, a smaller number are engaged in counterterrorism operations, focused on denying safe haven to and defeating the Taliban, al-Qaeda, ISIS-K, and associated forces, and are also (with an extra dash of authority from Article II) protecting U.S. and allied forces and interests. [read post]
6 Jan 2023, 2:17 pm by Katherine Pompilio
Darrell West was joined by John Villasenor and Mark MacCarthy to discuss Gonzalez v. [read post]