Search for: "Branch v. United States" Results 361 - 380 of 4,098
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jun 2016, 12:55 pm by Cecillia Wang
Today the Supreme Court announced that it was deadlocked four to four on United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2024, 5:46 am by Norman L. Eisen
United States — and when and how to apply the tests the Supreme Court ordered her to administer. [read post]
14 Jul 2024, 7:24 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
United States will remain the subject of intense debate and disagreement for decades to come. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 10:55 am by Jeremy Feigenbaum
Although the challengers in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
18 Jan 2025, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  One of his most striking examples is that executive agreements have since displaced treaties as the primary process through which the United States enters into international agreements. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 11:54 am by David Super
  The notion that the judiciary may supervise the political decisions of the two other branches was rejected as early as Chief Justice John Marshall’s landmark decision in Marbury v. [read post]
20 Feb 2025, 12:25 pm by Lawrence Solum
United States, the Supreme Court wrought two new presidential immunities from criminal prosecution. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 5:24 am by Tejinder Singh
Today in the Community we are discussing United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 11:59 am by Parker Higgins
Here's what the Deputy Solicitor General of the United States had to say during Tuesday's Aereo Supreme Court argument when asked directly whether a ruling might throw the United States out of line with international agreements: We haven't made that argument. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 4:25 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
The patent is assigned to The United States of America, represented by the Secretary of Commerce. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 2:04 pm
The Court ruled, instead, that “all the relevant conduct took place outside the United States. [read post]
27 Jul 2022, 8:55 am by Lawrence Solum
Hassid, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a California state regulation granting labor organizations a limited “right to take access” to agricultural employers’ property constitutes a per se physical taking. [read post]