Search for: "Adams v. Church" Results 21 - 40 of 337
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Oct 2022, 10:30 am
(the Church), whose adherents consume cannabis blessed by Church pastors as “sacrament. [read post]
4 Sep 2022, 4:30 am by jonathanturley
Indeed, it almost had that High Chancellor Adam Sutler look from V for Vendetta. [read post]
5 Aug 2022, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
National/Federal A Right-Wing Think Tank Claimed to Be a Church. [read post]
3 Aug 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
On an irreligiously religious note, consider Mark Twain’s Notebook comment on Adam in the Garden of Eden: “How lucky Adam was. [read post]
23 Jul 2022, 1:18 am by Frank Cranmer
The Law Commission is adamant that there would be no muddying of the water between humanist and independent celebrants: ‘any officiant should only be permitted to be authorised as one category of officiant at any one time, and that a nominated officiant should only be permitted to be nominated by one organisation at any one time’ (para 1.10). [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 2:29 pm by Randy E. Barnett
(2021) Donald Drakeman, The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory: Why We Need the Framers (2021) Jamal Greene, How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights is Tearing America Apart (2021) David Schwartz, The Spirit of the Constitution: John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. [read post]
20 Apr 2022, 9:30 pm by ernst
Privacy Rights in Modern America, by Adam D. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 7:48 am by Alan Z. Rozenshtein
The core of the seditious conspiracy offense, as the Supreme Court held in the 1886 case Baldwin v. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 9:54 am by Eric Goldman
As you recall, in December, a federal district court enjoined most of HB 20, Texas’ so-called “social media censorship” law. [read post]
8 Dec 2021, 2:13 pm
That was a reference to the opinions by Justices Pleicones and Hearn, who wanted to change the "neutral principles" rule laid down in All Saints Waccamaw to a "complete deference to the national church" rule of Watson v. [read post]