Search for: "In re Connor" Results 381 - 400 of 1,699
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Feb 2019, 11:10 am by MBettman
On January 23, 2019, Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor convened a task force to examine the Ohio bail system. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 10:18 am by MBettman
” Chief Justice O’Connor, to defense counsel On January 29, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in State of Ohio v. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 7:24 am by Jason Smith
We’re concerned that Murphy and the Democratic majorities in the Legislature will try to enact this proposal quickly to limit the opportunity for dissent. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 6:46 am by MBettman
” Chief Justice O’Connor, to Father’s lawyer On January 8, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of In re: Adoption of B.I. 2018-0182. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
When we're asking whether something is intelligent enough to do a certain task, the question shouldn't be whether we recognize its reasoning processes as intelligent in some inherent sense. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 7:35 am by MBettman
In re D.S., 2016-Ohio-1027 (It is not a due process violation to impose upon juvenile registration and notification requirements that extend beyond the age of 18 or 21.) [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 8:36 am by Adam Feldman
You’re the best — a great intellect, a great scholar, your family, your beautiful wife, your beautiful daughters, everyone is so perfect. [read post]
26 Dec 2018, 6:25 am by MBettman
Justice French dissented, joined by Chief Justice O’Connor. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 9:30 pm by Bobby Chen
Judge Reed O’Connor of the U.S. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 3:35 pm by Kathryn Rubino
Good news, a former federal judge says you're a terrorist. [read post]
4 Dec 2018, 1:17 pm by ilpc
In erroneously declaring the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) unconstitutional, O’Connor’s decision remains a legal anomaly that disregards legal precedent. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 11:07 am by Brad Schnure
We're urging the sponsors to table it permanently. https://t.co/NTGdIHrxNJ — NJ Senate GOP (@senatenj) November 29, 2018 The letter notes that the opposition at a recent hearing on the proposal was unanimous, with witnesses warning that the proposal would constitutionally mandate that future legislative districts be drawn in a way that is mathematically guaranteed to cement and even grow the Democratic Party’s legislative majorities, while disenfranchising millions of… [read post]
25 Nov 2018, 7:04 am by Andrew Koppelman
  Justice O’Connor’s opinion in Grutter v. [read post]