Search for: "United States v. Alvarez"
Results 341 - 360
of 660
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2012, 12:00 am
United States v Alvarez The Stolen Valor Act was enacted in 2006, its purpose being to make falsely claiming to have received a military decoration or medal a “misdemeanour” under the Act and punishable by up to a year’s imprisonment. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 5:58 am
At the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, Chelsea Phipps discusses the prospect that the government may have a more difficult time regulating false or misleading commercial speech in the wake of United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 10:12 am
Alvarez-Machain, which involved the extraterritorial actions of a non-citizen agent of the U.S. government – again, that is well within the purposes of the ATS and entirely distinct from corporations with only tenuous connections to the United States. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 7:00 am
United States. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 10:50 am
It is a law of the United States, which authorizes courts to apply domestic American law to activities with some substantial connection to the United States. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 10:04 am
Alvarez-Machain (2004). [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 6:43 am
The Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 7:26 am
In the aftermath of United States v. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 2:29 pm
” That’s the first line from Justice Kennedy’s plurality opinion in United States v. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 12:11 pm
Although many of the briefs filed in the Kiobel litigation take the “binary approach,” the briefs of the United States did not. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 11:55 am
With the Supreme Court's declaration in United States v. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 8:58 am
The following contribution to our Kiobel v. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 7:31 am
” Writing for the online journal Defining Ideas, Richard Epstein critiques the Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 1:55 pm
Alvarez-Mac-hain, and Samantar v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 8:51 am
Minnesota had asked the Supreme Court to hold its petition until the court decided United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 8:15 am
For example, in United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 4:09 pm
As the Court explained in United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 1:00 pm
On June 28, 2012 the Supreme Court announced its decision in United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 11:12 am
Content Regulation * State v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:12 am
The ACLU praised last week’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
