Search for: "Mubarak v. State" Results 21 - 40 of 44
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 May 2012, 10:25 am by Benjamin Wittes
The standard for removal and subsequent trial in absentia in both federal and U.S. military courts is Illinois v. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 11:51 am by Mike "No Man" Navarre
DoD Press Release, here, announces: The Department of Defense announced today that the convening authority, Office of Military Commissions, referred charges to a military commission in the case of “United States v. [read post]
19 Feb 2012, 6:01 am by Frank Pasquale
” By any measure, the United States is a constitutional republic in name only. [read post]
18 Feb 2012, 9:04 pm by Frank Pasquale
” By any measure, the United States is a constitutional republic in name only. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 7:38 am by Marissa Miller
Topics included abortion, religion, lawyers’ salaries, and the Justice’s recent opinion in United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 2:44 pm by Marissa Miller
In the skit, the Justice heard arguments in the case of Baby Bear v. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 5:00 am by Emily Chan
In January, we also witnessed Egyptian protesters organize a day of revolt in Tahir Square that lasted for 18 days until former President Hosni Mubarak stepped down from power. [read post]
19 Oct 2011, 2:17 pm by David Post
(David Post) As some of you may know, the 2d Circuit heard argument yesterday in the Viacom v. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 2:00 pm by Cynthia Wong
(As Harold Feld at Public Knowledge explains, turning off part of the telephone network also violates the Federal Communications Act.)BART claims that it was acting within the scope of a 1969 Supreme Court decision, Brandenburg v. [read post]
7 May 2011, 5:56 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  The state has always been a platform—an organizer of a set of consensual social norms. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 2:56 pm by Mohammad Fadel
An election law based on the principle of proportional representation so that Egypt can truly become a state of institutions and multiple parties. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 7:08 am
Hadkinson [1952] FLR 287, the husband should not be heard in relation to the application.Mrs Justice King considered the principles laid out in Mubarak v. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 1:49 am by Rumpole
United States, 10-5296, and Vazquez v. [read post]