Search for: "In re A. V." Results 3441 - 3460 of 62,914
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2023, 8:44 am by Neil H. Buchanan
Buchanan One of the safest bets in recent years was that Republicans would conveniently drop the pretense that they believe in states' rights as soon as their manufactured Supreme Court super-majority handed them their long-sought repeal of Roe v. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 7:36 am by Carl De Cicco and Jonathan Lord
Re-introduce protection against harassment by third parties Under the Equality Act 2010, there were protections against harassment by third parties. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 8:56 am by Unknown
According to the rulemaking petition, the soon-to-be-argued Supreme Court case Slack Technologies, LLC v. [read post]
Since 2014, states have had to contend with the holding of California v. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 7:38 am by Eugene Volokh
If people want to rob you, they're not willing to comply with a law against robbery, so they're probably not willing to comply with a law against gun possession in public, either. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 6:30 am by ernst
  And if you don’t know the topic well, you’re grateful to Mark for explaining it to you. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
Notably, the key decisions pre-date Roe v. [read post]
9 Apr 2023, 9:30 pm by ernst
  But if our luncheon guests put all these issues aside, as you're supposed to do in my heaven, I bet Frankfurter and Freund are absolutely wowed by Mark's spectacular book. [read post]
9 Apr 2023, 4:00 am by SOQUIJ
PÉNAL (DROIT) : Le fait que la plaignante a écouté et enregistré une conversation privilégiée entre l’accusé et son avocat a enfreint l’article 7 de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés; toutefois, des réparations moins sévères que l’arrêt des procédures peuvent corriger l’abus de procédure, notamment l’interdiction que la procureure de la… [read post]
8 Apr 2023, 2:35 am by Aaron L. Nielson
This week’s case that has drawn the most attention is United States v. [read post]