Search for: "Thomas v. United States Department of Housing "
Results 401 - 420
of 603
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Oct 2015, 12:33 pm
The simple fact is that most people will obey the law and some, at least, will be converted by it.Here's one from Police Department of the City of Chicago v. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 11:10 am
She also served in the General Counsel’s Office of the United States Department of Education, where she helped draft federal policy on issues of race, sex, and disability discrimination. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 6:01 am
One of the justifications for a local final appellate court was that it would enhance access to justice as litigants would not have to bear the costs of travel to the United Kingdom. [read post]
25 Aug 2015, 7:38 am
An explicit statement that courts’ regulating their own procedure was a proper judicial function came a few days later, in Bank of the United States v. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 7:18 am
It prefaced its analysis of the issues in this case by explaining that the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, `The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause. . . . [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 6:21 pm
Companies that house and maintain large amounts of personal information and data need to tailor any defense, mitigation and response plans accordingly. [read post]
26 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
House of Representatives. [read post]
25 Jul 2015, 11:37 am
Defendant initially came onto the department’s radar when he was fined by the state department of agriculture for providing substandard housing to migrant workers. [read post]
17 Jul 2015, 7:39 am
The first is United States v. [read post]
16 Jul 2015, 7:59 am
As the trial court found, “their hope was to return to the United States when they had saved enough money for a down payment on a house. [read post]
Symposium: The Supreme Court recognizes but limits disparate impact in its Fair Housing Act decision
26 Jun 2015, 5:58 am
On June 25, 2015, the Supreme Court, by a five-to-four margin, upheld the application of disparate impact under the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 9:21 am
Roberts, Jr., announces that Justice Kennedy has the opinion of the Court in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 8:27 am
Today in a 5-4 decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 9:29 am
United States, 14-916, which involves a provision of the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006 stating that contracting officers at the Department of Veterans Affairs “shall award” contracts on the basis of competition restricted to small businesses owned by veterans whenever there is a “reasonable expectation” that two or more such businesses will bid for the contract at “a fair and reasonable price… [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 9:30 pm
” The United States Supreme Court recently tried to clarify the meaning of this law in the case Elonis v. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 12:39 pm
Before turning to the remainder of the inquiry, there is one aspect of the Court’s opinion that will warm the hearts of those who teach constitutional law and litigate against the Department of Justice in the area of foreign affairs: the impact of United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 10:32 am
” In making that plea, the government lawyers had relied upon a sweeping statement by the Court, in the 1936 decision in United States v. [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 7:32 am
Justice Thomas (joined by Justice Scalia) was chattier. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 3:36 am
United States. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 11:58 pm
Considering how many cert petitions the SCOTUS has to decide on at any given point in time, one may or (as I do) may not believe that an incredibly deep analysis of such questions as whether declaring code is more or less functional than other program code has occurred so far.As for the second question, I would be thoroughly surprised if the Department of Justice determined that Google's agenda in this context is in the interest of the United States. [read post]
