Search for: "Vote v. United States"
Results 421 - 440
of 9,475
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Nov 2023, 10:37 am
Furthermore, it was held in Davis v United States (8th Cir. 1917) that a public trial is broadly defined as a trial at which the public is free to attend. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 9:03 pm
Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 3:46 am
” Part V will respond to recent academic arguments suggesting that the President is an “officer of the United States” for purposes of Section 3. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 2:37 am
The biggest legal news of the week was almost certainly the judgment of the Supreme Court in R (AAA (Syria) & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42, in which the Court held unanimously that the Secretary of State’s policy of sending asylum-seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 1:07 am
The biggest legal news of the week was almost certainly the judgment of the Supreme Court in R (AAA (Syria) & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42, in which the Court held unanimously that the Secretary of State’s policy of sending asylum-seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. [read post]
18 Nov 2023, 4:28 am
They made no distinction between an officer, which included the president, an officer of the United States, and an officer under the United States. [read post]
18 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
” In her 102-page ruling, Wallace declared that “[a]fter considering the arguments on both sides, the Court is persuaded that ‘officers of the United States’ did not include the President of the United States. [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 9:05 pm
During debates, state Democrats argued that the bill is intended to challenge Arizona v. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 1:28 pm
United States, Thomas v. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 12:15 pm
L. v. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 9:05 pm
On November 3, 2023, the 10 voting members of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC” or “Council”)[1] voted unanimously to finalize (1) amendments to its existing interpretive guidance (“2019 Interpretive Guidance”)[2] governing the designation of nonbank financial companies for supervision by the Federal Reserve Board and application of prudential standards (“Interpretive Guidance”)[3]and (2) an “analytic… [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 1:45 am
Notwithstanding potential opposition to the plan in the House of Lords, abolition of Section 40 could spell the formal end of the state-backed press regulation system envisaged by the Leveson report. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 10:25 am
In the long litany of head-scratching moments emerging from our growing knowledge about the highest-ranking Republican in the United States government, I was both confused and amused when I saw this in The Guardian. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 7:30 am
United States, a Supreme Court ruling that requires police officers to get a warrant to obtain cell phone location information from a cell phone company. [read post]
4 Nov 2023, 4:02 pm
Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit voted 2-1 to overturn an injunction against Illinois’ “assault weapons” ban. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 10:05 am
Throughout your career, you have consistently advocated positions on behalf of the United States in an exemplary manner. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 8:35 am
The first is when a statute that explicitly strips the government of immunity – specifying, for example, that the “United States is not immune from liability under this section. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 2:58 pm
In two previous posts (here and here) I've pointed out some erroneous arguments by Merrick Garland's Justice Department in its reply brief filed in United States v. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 6:38 am
Fla.) in Coin Center v. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court will hear Harrington v. [read post]
