Search for: "Hudson v. US Government"
Results 421 - 440
of 604
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jan 2011, 8:51 pm
Between Wickard v. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 6:20 pm
(p. 60) In light of [United States v. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 5:01 pm
Gonzales v. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 7:24 am
Let’s see… A-list bloggers, are you all with us? [read post]
23 Jan 2011, 3:42 am
Another Wang Xiaoning v. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 11:15 am
We’ve blogged about United States v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 1:48 pm
A case like U.S. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2011, 2:50 pm
Green and many others get the concept of freedom in order to maintain a strong society, the government does not. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 7:56 am
The Fourth Circuit opinion in United States v. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 8:36 am
Hudson was the presiding judge for the lawsuit brought against the US Government by Virginia over a mandate requiring people to buy health insurance by 2014. [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 9:45 pm
District Judge Henry Hudson of the Eastern District of Virginia is the first jurist in the country to rule that Congress exceeded its constitutional authority in setting the minimum-coverage mandate. [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 5:26 pm
We hold that the statute unambiguously bans all solicitation for 48 hours and that this restriction on commercial speech violates Article I, § 4 of the Florida Constitution under the standards of Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 10:56 am
Morrison, Morrison v. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 1:13 pm
Randy’s argument is more or less the one Justice Scalia makes in his concurring opinion in Gonzales v. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 8:03 am
And this is what Judge Hudson did in Virgina v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 8:17 am
Calabresi, “A Government of Limited and Enumerated Powers”: In Defense of United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 6:57 am
" United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 9:19 pm
Hoffman v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 8:47 pm
In my view, a far better answer to the government’s argument is that the mandate isn’t “proper” even if it is “necessary” and that it runs afoul of the five part test recently outlined by the Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 7:10 pm
The primary one is Wickard v. [read post]
