Search for: "State v. Save"
Results 361 - 380
of 11,692
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2011, 9:27 am
In Brady v. [read post]
24 Apr 2024, 1:52 am
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will consider Wednesday when doctors can provide abortions during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the high court’s sweeping decision overturning Roe v. [read post]
27 Mar 2020, 2:16 pm
The action, titled Cheng v. [read post]
15 Dec 2018, 5:15 pm
In Texas v. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 11:40 am
Facts: This case (Savidge et al v. [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 12:02 pm
A little more than a year ago, back in February 2008, a majority of the Supreme Court stated, in Riegel v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 9:04 am
(Gentry v. [read post]
13 May 2010, 10:17 pm
(Szetela v. [read post]
17 Aug 2016, 1:00 pm
In Luis v. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 2:57 pm
In AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
7 Apr 2017, 12:27 pm
However, as the court found in EmbroidMe.com, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 8:50 am
After determining that the Grutter Court’s compelling interest holding cannot be logically defended on traditional equal protection grounds, Part V rejects any attempt to save Grutter under principles of stare decisis. [read post]
30 May 2017, 8:00 am
Kindred Nursing Centers, L.P. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2015, 3:46 am
As the case of Mellouli v. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 4:04 pm
State Department’s mandatory retirement at age 65 of certain employees policy violates Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) Miller v Clinton, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Docket #10-5405 The United States Department of State terminated the employment of John R. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 10:29 am
Supreme Court on July 26 issued its judgment in the case of Dobbs v. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 3:52 am
The state adopted a seatbelt statute, as have all other states, based on evidence of savings of lives and money. [read post]
26 Mar 2008, 5:39 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
Unless a convention of the states assembled pursuant to Article V proceeds to ignore the language of Article V, the current structure of the Senate cannot be changed, and even permissible amendments will need the assent of 38 states. [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 5:29 pm
" Goldsmith, 526 U.S. at 534; see, e.g., United States v. [read post]
