Search for: "STATE v. AMARAL"
Results 401 - 420
of 641
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Feb 2015, 9:01 pm
That’s Constitutional Law I/Marbury v. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 9:01 pm
In Coleman v. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 4:04 pm
Opposition is growing over State Government plans to extend defamation laws. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 6:04 am
At Verdict, Vikram Amar analyzes the legislature’s brief in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:01 pm
Davis v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:01 pm
Davis v. [read post]
3 Jan 2015, 11:17 am
The United States District Court of the Northern District of Florida made a landmark decision in Brenner, et al. v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm
Last year, in United States v. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm
As Vikram David Amar and Alan E. [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm
Since the Supreme Court has observed, first in the seminal case of Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm
Background on the King v. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 9:01 pm
United States and Printz v. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 9:01 pm
Department of Transportation v. [read post]
22 Oct 2014, 10:39 am
The district court in Dart remanded a removed case back to state court. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 9:01 pm
One interesting case to be argued in a couple of months, Elonis v. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court wrote its Hollingsworth v. [read post]
20 Sep 2014, 10:01 pm
It is USA v. [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 9:01 pm
SB 1272 submits the following question (designated by the California Secretary of State as Proposition 49) to the California electorate for its input: Shall the Congress of the United States propose, and the California Legislature ratify, an amendment or amendments to the United States Constitution to overturn Citizens United v. [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 9:01 pm
And in situations like these, the Supreme Court has held, in a somewhat well-known 1977 case, Marks v. [read post]
29 Jun 2014, 9:01 pm
Courts can revisit their prior rulings, higher courts can change the legal landscape against which lower courts make decisions (as the Supreme Court in fact did in the immigration regulation setting in 2012 in Arizona v. [read post]
