Search for: "State v. Stephens." Results 3181 - 3200 of 7,109
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Nov 2019, 7:59 am by Xi Lucy Shi
In Randall, Justice Stephen Breyer stated that “contribution limits that are too low can … harm the electoral process by preventing challengers from mounting effective campaigns against incumbent officeholders, thereby reducing democratic accountability. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 10:53 am by Ronald Mann
In a colloquy with Assistant to the Solicitor General Anthony Yang (representing the department), Justice Stephen Breyer stated outright that he finds the statute ambiguous, recounting two different ways to read it. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 1:14 am by GuestPost
For insightful analysis, Stephen Macedo’s famous “God versus John Rawls” article: “Liberal Civic Education and Religious Fundamentalism: The Case of God v. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 12:13 pm by Stephen Halbrook
Heller and then further prescribed in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. [read post]
13 Apr 2007, 3:14 pm
If they did, the Chevron framework in administrative law would be hard to justify-at least if Chevron is to be justified, as it is in United States v. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 11:06 am by Benjamin Bissell
Nathan Cirillo, before entering Canada’s Parliament building, where Prime Minister Stephen Harper was meeting with MPs. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 11:02 am by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
Sotomayor is difficult to predict, but it is interesting she sided with Kennedy, not Justice Stephen Breyer. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 3:59 am by Maxwell Kennerly
As factors indicating oppressiveness, Eagles quotes the Tenth Circuit’s list but states in the alternative, quoting (see id. at 729) our opinion in S Industries, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 6:13 am by Maxwell Kennerly
” Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts of the United States: Hearings Before the H. [read post]
1 Dec 2015, 7:16 pm by Rory Little
 The first question can be traced to some sloppy “law of the case” dictum in United States v. [read post]