Search for: "Witte v. United States" Results 321 - 340 of 452
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2014, 6:55 am by Tara Hofbauer
” On Tuesday, Wells highlighted opinions from the federal District of Oregon in United States v. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 10:45 am by John Elwood
United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
” To “defraud the United States” has a specific meaning under U.S. case law: According to Hammerschmidt v. [read post]
15 Jun 2013, 7:00 am by Raffaela Wakeman
Next up are hearings for another military commission case, United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 5:31 pm by Benjamin Wittes
I disagree with Robert Chesney and Benjamin Wittes’ comments on the Salahi v. [read post]
14 Nov 2015, 5:18 am by Elina Saxena
They also explored how the United States can strike a “balance between privacy, security and the economic imperatives driving innovation” among other topics. [read post]
26 May 2019, 7:48 am by Sarah Grant
The second covers the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Pepper v. [read post]
26 May 2019, 7:48 am by Sarah Grant
The second covers the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Pepper v. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 6:00 am by Quinta Jurecic
This question—and the case behind it, McCreary County v. [read post]
23 May 2017, 10:45 am by Russell Spivak
Facebook’s minimum contacts with the United States are beyond dispute. [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 2:35 pm by Masha Simonova
Federal sovereign immunity doctrine holds that no one can sue the United States without its consent—sovereign immunity is thus pleaded around by suing officers. [read post]
13 Dec 2014, 6:55 am by Benjamin Bissell
And, with all this talk of authorizations to use military force, Cody Poplin shared the text of the documents from the last time the United States declared a state of war following the attacks on Pearl Harbor in this week’s Throwback Thursday. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 11:30 am by John Elwood
United States, 15-5238, out of the way. [read post]
9 Jan 2019, 5:37 am by Quinta Jurecic
Much of the commentary around on Trump’s proposed national emergency has focused on the framework set out in Justice Robert Jackson’s deservedly famous concurrence in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]