Search for: "Catoe v. United States" Results 381 - 400 of 672
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Oct 2014, 12:54 pm
United States and whether a treaty can increase the legislative power of Congress — is available here. [read post]
1 Oct 2014, 5:12 am by Amy Howe
United States, an insider-trading case that is scheduled for consideration at the Court’s October 10 Conference. [read post]
27 Sep 2014, 6:55 am by Benjamin Bissell
Jane shared the government’s response-and-reply brief in Klayman v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 8:03 am by Lyle Denniston
  And, in any event, it contended that the Supreme Court settled the issue against this kind of challenge in United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 1:04 am
On Saturday afternoon, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled unconstitutional the District’s absolute prohibition on the carrying of handguns outside the home for lawful self-defense, in the case of Palmer v. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 9:04 am by Amy Howe
United States, in which a commercial fisherman was prosecuted under the federal Sarbanes-Oxley Act for destroying undersized fish, and the amicus brief that Cato filed in the case. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 8:11 am by Walter Olson
Cross-posted from Cato at Liberty, a guest post from my Cato colleague Andrew Grossman: Enough is enough, the Supreme Court ruled today in Harris v. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 5:20 am by Amy Howe
Grossman at Cato at Liberty. [read post]
14 Jun 2014, 7:00 am by Tara Hofbauer
United States and explored the ruling’s impact on foreign affairs exceptionalism, Executive Branch authority, and foreign relations law. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 6:05 am by Amy Howe
United States, the case of a Pennsylvania woman who attempted to poison her husband’s paramour. [read post]
6 May 2014, 5:11 am by Amy Howe
California and United States v. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 6:19 am by Amy Howe
United States, involving restitution for victims of child pornography; and White v. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 1:55 pm by Mark Walsh
There is no authority in the Constitution of the United States or in this Court’s precedents for the Judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit this policy determination to the voters. [read post]