Search for: "Young v. United States" Results 3301 - 3320 of 3,681
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Feb 2020, 1:32 pm by Charlotte Butash, Benjamin Wittes
See Government’s Supplemental and Amended Sentencing Memorandum, United States v. [read post]
16 Oct 2018, 8:17 am by Andrew Hamm
Most broadly, I argue that when we disagree over what the Constitution means in public schools, we engage in an argument that is fundamentally about what sort of nation we want the United States to be. [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 10:01 am by jonathanturley
However, it is a modified comparative negligence state so they must show that they are 50 percent or less at fault. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
That document, written in the rhythm and words of the Declaration of Independence, condemned a wide range of “injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman”—everything from withholding the right to vote to applying different codes of moral conduct—and demanded “immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States. [read post]
Yet we have a person in the White House, who holds the office of President of the United States, who does not fully, or even partially, understand what it means to have power. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 10:51 am by Schachtman
Schepers ultimately stayed in the United States, and moved through jobs with DuPont, and later with the Veteran’s Administration. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm by Rodger Citron
Administrative Review Board, United States Department of Labor, which became known as “the Case of the Frozen Trucker. [read post]
8 Sep 2019, 9:05 pm by Paul C. Light
Trump continues to taunt federal employees with fear-mongering about the deep state, pay freezes, and attacks on the merit system. [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 6:36 am by Schachtman
INS, 240 F.3d 642, 645 n.7 (7th Cir. 2001) (Nazi deportation); United States v. [read post]
8 Oct 2020, 10:20 am by Phil Dixon
(1) Trial court’s instructions that the jury “will determine what the assault was” did not amount to an improper expression of opinion on the evidence in context; (2) The trial court’s response to a jury question during deliberations regarding a prior conviction was an not impermissible expression of opinion on the evidence State v. [read post]