Search for: "Brown v. Justice" Results 3361 - 3380 of 5,257
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Aug 2015, 10:46 am
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected a petition for rehearing en banc in Sissel v. [read post]
18 Mar 2014, 2:32 am
By my reckoning, the Justices haven’t considered right-of-access questions since 1986, so not a single member of the Court today has opined on the issue (except in Presley v. [read post]
19 Aug 2011, 7:37 am by Andrew Koppelman
The Equal Protection Clause is the reason the Court has struck down laws that impose certain inequalities, such as the race discrimination that was challenged in Brown v. [read post]
1 May 2016, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 26 April 2016. [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 4:11 am by James Romoser
At Mayer Brown’s Class Defense Blog, Archis Parasharami, Kevin Ranlett and Daniel Jones analyze the court’s recent decision in Barr v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 9:37 am by Amy Howe
Justice Elena Kagan dissented, in an opinion joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. [read post]
28 May 2011, 10:48 pm by INFORRM
Shandil v Sharma, Mundine v Brown, Holmes v Fraser, Ryan v Premachandran, PK v BV, Moumoutzakis v Carpino, Pak v The Korean Times, Woolcott v Seeger, – four NSW Supreme Court, three NSW District Court, one WA Supreme Court. $20,000 – $50,000. [read post]
23 May 2016, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 26 April 2016. [read post]
  Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor voted to approve Biden’s request for the court to restrict Texas’ actions. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 10:01 am by Stephanie Woods, Associate, Olswang LLP
His appointment follows the retirement of Lord Brown earlier this year. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For a constitutional theory to be (minimally) acceptable, it must preserve the result in Brown v. [read post]