Search for: "Butler v. Stephens" Results 21 - 40 of 67
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2015, 2:55 am by NCC Staff
During Sumner’s speech, Senator Stephen Douglas told a colleague, “That damn fool will get himself killed by some other damn fool. [read post]
21 Nov 2006, 7:48 pm
Demner, The Nuclear Terrorism Convention: Will Detainees Be Classified as "Enemy Combatants" by the United States Harvard Law Review, Volume 120, Number 1, November 2006 Neal Kumar Katyal, Hamdan v. [read post]
22 Oct 2007, 10:53 am
Code § 36-1-3-6(a) (when a statutory provision requires a power to be exercised in a specific manner, the municipality must exercise the power in that manner).In James Butler v. [read post]
30 Aug 2013, 1:03 pm by Don Cruse
THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH, ET AL., No. 11-0265 Opinion of the Court Dissenting Applying its decision today in ROBERT MASTERSON, MARK BROWN, GEORGE BUTLER... v. [read post]
31 Oct 2007, 8:53 am
It was, for a time, purely “metaphysical,” as Justice Stephen G. [read post]
15 Nov 2016, 8:56 am by Marie-Andree Weiss
”“The clothes on the hanger do nothing; the clothes on the woman do everything,” – Justice Stephen G. [read post]
21 May 2012, 4:54 am by INFORRM
Last week’s resolved cases include: Mr John Donovan v Metro, Clause 1, 21/05/2012; Lesley Archer v The Echo (Southend), Clause 1, 18/05/2012; Ms Nicola Searle v South Wales Echo, Clauses 1, 3, 17/05/2012; Mr Liam Fairlie v North Devon Journal, Clause 1, 17/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v Northampton Chronicle & Echo, Clause 1, 17/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v The Sun, Clause 1, 17/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v Daily Mirror, Clause 1,… [read post]
29 May 2009, 10:02 am
There are lower-court judges who do this Realist thing -- say, Richard Posner or Stephen Reinhardt. [read post]
15 May 2007, 8:26 am
Scalia and Thomas have a clear and large-scale vision for constitutional law, in which (for example) affirmative action is abolished, Roe v. [read post]
28 Jul 2022, 12:33 pm by Josh Blackman
This drawing is from oral arguments in Printz v. [read post]