Search for: "People v Rubio"
Results 21 - 40
of 77
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Oct 2018, 5:00 am
As the Wall Street Journal reported in December 2017, the amount of surveillance equipment used for every 100,000 people in Xinjiang roughly equals what is used to monitor over a million people in other parts of China. [read post]
22 Mar 2020, 11:28 am
” [Rubio v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 2:01 pm
People that I knew had seen (the ad), so it had gotten around. [read post]
21 Mar 2007, 4:40 am
People v. [read post]
13 Nov 2015, 11:13 am
”Burke v. [read post]
4 Sep 2018, 1:39 pm
Ferguson, Korematsu v. [read post]
4 Aug 2016, 1:49 pm
Even the Supreme Court prefers to treat Bush v. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 11:45 am
But is the democratic ideal really to be governed by people who do not receive majority support from the relevant voting constituency (here in Florida, Marco Rubio leads a three-way Senate race with 44 % in the latest polls)? [read post]
25 Aug 2017, 3:03 pm
See Davison v. [read post]
19 Sep 2010, 7:02 am
Governor Christie seems like one; so does Marco Rubio, although I know less about him. [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 3:30 pm
He cited Lochner v. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 3:00 am
Marco Rubio live on CNN for his support for the NRA. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 12:44 pm
In 2017, in Matal v. [read post]
30 Mar 2020, 5:00 am
Senator Rubio couldn’t be more right.Is this Constitutional? [read post]
5 May 2010, 5:13 am
"Miranda," comes from Miranda v. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 7:46 am
Marco Rubio of Florida never put in bill form, would have done the same thing. [read post]
2 May 2012, 2:00 am
District Court in Synar v. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 1:17 am
WARDENLeagle.comThe WVSCA held that the West Virginia analogue to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 "does not require a trial court to advise a defendant concerning a ...See all stories on this topic PEOPLE v. [read post]
28 Jun 2015, 6:40 am
This morning, people in coffee houses and churches across the land will no doubt be talking about the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling in Obergefell v. [read post]
