Search for: "Hook v. United States"
Results 321 - 340
of 723
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2007, 8:36 pm
The dust-up concerns Gaddis v. [read post]
26 May 2023, 10:54 am
Under the Clean Water Act, these agencies have dual regulatory authority to protect “waters of the United States” and “adjacent wetlands. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 12:33 pm
Supreme Court, November 09, 2009 Bobby v. [read post]
29 Aug 2013, 11:20 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2023, 5:30 am
For the past few years, I have watched with some apprehension the explosion of legalized gambling in the United States. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 11:41 am
Swirsky v. [read post]
11 Nov 2009, 8:10 am
 Again at Sentencing Law and Policy, Berman speculates that capital punishment will stand strong in United States public opinion with “poster children†like Muhammad and other multiple-murderers widely discussed in the media. [read post]
4 Mar 2007, 5:41 am
Time Warner Cable, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Sep 2021, 3:22 am
But what about the United States? [read post]
12 May 2011, 11:23 am
As a result, if the Supreme Court adopts the activity/inactivity distinction, it seems likely that future Congresses will use whatever hook the Supreme Court says is required — and not one iota more — to make sure their laws pass judicial muster.We saw this with Congress’s reaction to United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 8:31 am
See United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 5:17 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:00 am
Krauss, New Light on the History of Free Exercise Exemptions: The Debates in Two Eighteenth-Century State Legislatures, (Catholic University Law Review, Vol. 71, No. 4, 2022).Luke Boso, Religious Liberty, Discriminatory Intent, and the Status Quo Constitution, (Univ. of San Francisco Law Research Paper , Jan. 2023).Enrico Bonadio, Krishna Ravi Srinivas, Balaji Parthasarathy Iyengar & Atreya Choudhary, Gandhian Philosophy and Indian Intellectual Property, (in Relevance of… [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 5:55 am
The court found this objectivity requirement consistent with the quality control element of State v. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 2:55 pm
In United States v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:09 am
United States, 986 F. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
United States, 986 F. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
United States, 986 F. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
United States, 986 F. [read post]
9 May 2019, 5:08 pm
We have already seen the United States respond extremely critically to all three aspects of the Russia — Transit panel report. [read post]
