Search for: "United States v. Harris" Results 21 - 40 of 2,515
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Mar 2025, 7:16 pm by Robert Kuhn
  The amount stated in the good faith offer cannot be “less than the agency’s appraisal of just compensation. [read post]
21 Mar 2025, 12:38 pm by John Floyd
United States that Congress does not have the authority to overrule the Miranda decision because it is a “constitutionally based right. [read post]
21 Mar 2025, 9:47 am by Guest Author
Wilkins “concerned only members of the Indian tribes within the United States, and had no tendency to deny citizenship to children born in the United States of foreign parents”; Perkins v. [read post]
20 Mar 2025, 8:13 am by Leonard L. Gordon and Megan Barbero
United States, the Supreme Court’s 1935 decision holding that Congress may limit the president’s authority to remove members of the FTC without good cause. [read post]
20 Mar 2025, 8:13 am by Leonard L. Gordon and Megan Barbero
United States, the Supreme Court’s 1935 decision holding that Congress may limit the president’s authority to remove members of the FTC without good cause. [read post]
19 Mar 2025, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
 Because it found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their challenge, and the balance of equities tipped in their favor,  the court enjoined the enforcement of these portions of the executive orders anywhere in the United States. [read post]
14 Mar 2025, 11:57 am by Scott Bomboy
Harris applied for a partial stay in three cases: Trump v. [read post]
14 Mar 2025, 4:25 am by SHG
Perhaps the New York Times failed to recognize its Freudian slip, that the interim Solicitor General, Sarah Harris, isn’t a lawyer for President Trump, but a lawyer for the United States of America. [read post]
10 Mar 2025, 6:57 am by Brian Lipshutz
United States, a 1935 decision upholding the constitutionality of for-cause removal protections for members of the FTC. [read post]
7 Mar 2025, 12:30 pm by John Ross
" For more than 20 years, Montana, the United States, and hydroelectric dam owners have litigated about which government owns the riverbeds where the dams sit, and, thus, to whom the dam owners must pay rent. [read post]
6 Mar 2025, 5:46 am by Scott Bomboy
In a petition to the Supreme Court filed in Department of State v. [read post]
6 Mar 2025, 3:11 am by Kurt R. Karst
  In a decision last year, United States v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 7:55 pm by John Elwood
Judge Harris Hartz dissented, citing Supreme Court precedent recognizing that “speech is not unprotected merely because it is uttered by professionals. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 5:48 am by Burt Neuborne
In the end, as Secretary Schlesinger explained, the suspension orders were not transmitted only because the fast-moving events in the United States courts and the time lag between the United States and Cambodia made it impossible to effectuate timely service of Justice William Douglas’ order on the Secretary of Defense. [read post]