Search for: "Addington v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 47
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Nov 2006, 12:16 pm
Kinkopf of Georgia State University College of Law, link from November, 2005.Prof. [read post]
16 May 2011, 9:40 am
The Ninth Circuit’s Decision in Addington v. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 8:50 pm
Thursday's suit is known as Jewel v. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 9:01 pm
If a person is a danger to himself, then he might be subject to civil commitment, under Addington v. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 6:04 am
January 9, 2009 PRELIMINARY MEMORANDUM OF THE JUSTICE ROBERT H. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 8:40 am
S. 346 ; Addington v. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 2:40 pm
Supp. 51 (D.D.C. 1973) (holding that the $10,000 jurisdictional amount in controversy requirement then in the statute (it's since been eliminated) was not satisfied); United States v. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 9:01 pm
In the 1979 case of Addington v. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 7:04 pm
In Addington v. [read post]
22 May 2009, 9:29 am
Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 690 (2001); Addington v. [read post]
21 Nov 2013, 9:04 pm
Addington v. [read post]
17 May 2007, 4:49 pm
"Now, imagine you are the CEO or General Counsel of a telcom company that has been assisting the NSA in electronic surveillance for two years, assured that what appear to be your violations of FISA do not subject you to legal exposure because you have been relying on the certification "by the Attorney General of the United States that no warrant or court order is required by law. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:15 am
” United States v. [read post]
6 Jun 2007, 10:50 pm
Bush's innovations as he or she continues the development of the National Surveillance State. [read post]
8 Oct 2006, 1:10 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Jul 2009, 1:36 pm
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]
15 May 2007, 4:48 am
., that it violated FISA and that the Article II argument OLC had previously approved was not an adequate justification (a conclusion prompted by the New AAG, Jack Goldsmith, having undertaken a systematic review of OLC's previous legal opinions regarding the Commander in Chief's powers); (ii) that the White House nevertheless continued with the program anyway, despite DOJ's judgment that it was unlawful; (iii) that Comey, Ashcroft, the head of the FBI (Robert Mueller) and several… [read post]
15 May 2007, 4:48 am
., that it violated FISA and that the Article II argument OLC had previously approved was not an adequate justification (a conclusion prompted by the New AAG, Jack Goldsmith, having undertaken a systematic review of OLC's previous legal opinions regarding the Commander in Chief's powers); (ii) that the White House nevertheless continued with the program anyway, despite DOJ's judgment that it was unlawful; (iii) that Comey, Ashcroft, the head of the FBI (Robert Mueller) and several… [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 10:33 am
” Yesterday’s People v. [read post]
12 Apr 2008, 5:32 am
This principle was established by the United States in one of the most dramatic of the post-World War II proceedings, United States v. [read post]
