Search for: "Lopez v. Power"
Results 21 - 40
of 577
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Apr 2010, 6:00 am
Bellot-Paul v. [read post]
2 May 2013, 10:47 am
Rivera-Lopez, 2012 WL 5462677 (D.P.R. [read post]
25 Mar 2012, 9:25 pm
Lopez? [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 11:59 am
Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 566-67 (1995), where the Court reminded us that it will continue to strike down laws as exceeding the commerce power. [read post]
1 Aug 2017, 10:39 am
” The lawsuit is Alejandro Luis Lopez, Tammy Brooks, and Ana Lopez as Personal Representative of the Estates of Jose Alexandro Luis Lopez and Isaiah Alexander Luis Lopez v. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 11:06 pm
Lopez, 514 U. [read post]
17 Jul 2016, 9:49 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 6:55 am
Lopez , 514 U. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 10:47 pm
Lopez, and United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 1:27 pm
” If Lopez and Morrison represented the outer bounds of government power, the government could impose any economic mandate that addressed a national problem. [read post]
27 Aug 2007, 10:00 am
We've been tracking the status of Lopez Torres v. [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 9:38 am
The Act therefore falls within Congress's power under the third Lopez category.The court went on to find that the Act also falls under the second Lopez category, regulation of persons or things in interstate commerce. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 12:56 pm
Three years after Lopez, in United States v. [read post]
30 Jul 2016, 7:54 pm
The district court believed it was entitled to do this pursuant to Apprendi v. [read post]
30 Jun 2016, 5:49 am
Lopez, addresses prosecutorial misconduct (Doyle error); the second, United States v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 6:18 pm
Although the collective action theory of federalism may be able to account for Lopez and Morrison, it is utterly unable to account for New York v. [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 5:00 am
" Champion v. [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 7:02 am
Souter wrote the opinion for the Court in Lopez v. [read post]
15 Jan 2009, 3:39 am
Lopez, which struck down the Gun Free School Zones Act, and the second was US v. [read post]
