Search for: "State v. Reed" Results 321 - 340 of 2,140
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2013, 9:30 am by Karen Tani
 While the ERA is a topic touched upon in college courses, it has been forgotten by generations of Americans who believe that the Fourteenth Amendment sufficiently addresses the rights of women, and that court precedent (such as Reed v Reed in 1971) and policies (such as Title VII, Title IX) protect their rights. [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 7:15 am by Dave Rein
I previously wrote that I was hoping the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Reed Elsevier Inc. v. [read post]
17 Mar 2020, 10:03 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Here: Front Pages   PDFArticle How the New Deal Became a Raw Deal for Indian Nations: Justice Stanley Reed and the Tee-Hit-Ton Decision on Indian Title – Kent McNeil   PDF Comments Keeping Cultural Bias Out of the Courtroom: How ICWA “Qualified Expert Witnesses” Make a Difference – Elizabeth Low   PDF Being Uighur . . . with “Chinese Characteristics”: Analyzing China’s Legal Crusade… [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 7:36 am by Erin Miller
United States No. 08-103, Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 11:40 pm by Amy Howe
” At Wisconsin Appellate Law, Kellen Kasper discusses a recent Seventh Circuit decision striking down, in the wake of the Court’s recent decision in Reed v. [read post]
27 Jul 2013, 5:00 am by Bexis
  The subject is preemption – specifically the the United States Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Mutual Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. v. [read post]
3 May 2017, 9:36 am by Andrew Hamm
Reed ruled that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment prohibited discrimination on the basis of sex, and 1973, when the court in Frontiero v. [read post]
23 Nov 2017, 3:44 am by DARRYL HUTCHEON, MATRIX
Perhaps surprisingly, the Court unequivocally departs from its decision in R (Kaiyam) v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] UKSC 66 (decided less than three years earlier) to endorse the narrower understanding of the obligation set down by the ECtHR in James v UK (App no. 25119/09). [read post]