Search for: "People v. Nixon"
Results 401 - 420
of 528
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Sep 2017, 11:13 am
NFIB v. [read post]
8 Jan 2019, 6:35 am
Here’s the key, striking passage from page 7 of the government's petition in Trump v. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 7:33 pm
Ohio; Cox v. [read post]
20 Aug 2007, 4:40 pm
" Nixon v. [read post]
31 Dec 2023, 3:30 pm
The textbook case on this issue is Harper & Row v. [read post]
7 May 2019, 3:45 am
” Sussman v. [read post]
28 Mar 2023, 7:30 am
Pereira v. [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 5:30 pm
Burns, 427 U.S. 347(1976) and Branti v. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 5:28 am
Consider the case of Nixon v Ross Coates Solicitors that was heard by the EAT earlier this year (and thus predating the Equality Act). [read post]
20 May 2024, 8:40 am
By contrast, Paul-Emile’s theory might suggest a revisionist reading of Gonzales v. [read post]
12 Feb 2025, 1:03 pm
Courts overturned Nixon, Bush, and Trump. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 5:04 am
That opinion, in turn, was probably prompted by the Watergate scandal; it was issued the day after Nixon resigned. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
That argument is based on a line of civil cases establishing that presidents can’t be held liable via monetary damages for their official actions—more specifically, as the Supreme Court held in 1981 in Nixon v. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 1:55 am
In order for the initiative to revise the constitution, supermajorities of the legislature must propose it to the people for enactment. [read post]
21 Apr 2024, 2:25 pm
Indeed, Jack Smith can be sued in torts for unconstitutionally depriving people of liberty and property. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 1:05 pm
In 2016, Swarns served as lead counsel for Buck, arguing Buck v. [read post]
12 Feb 2017, 9:29 pm
“Objective reasonableness” is an appropriate touchstone for regulating force, but the ill-informed Graham v. [read post]
29 Sep 2019, 4:08 pm
Canada In the case of Huff v Zuk, 2019 ABQB 691 K D Nixon J awarded the plaintiff defamation damages of $50,000 in action between two dentists. [read post]
2 Dec 2024, 6:16 am
’” In making that finding, Mehta had quoted the Supreme Court’s strict test for incitement in the landmark case of Brandenberg v. [read post]
9 Mar 2012, 5:34 am
Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974). [read post]
