Search for: "State v. Frank"
Results 4381 - 4385
of 4,385
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 May 2007, 4:48 am
., that it violated FISA and that the Article II argument OLC had previously approved was not an adequate justification (a conclusion prompted by the New AAG, Jack Goldsmith, having undertaken a systematic review of OLC's previous legal opinions regarding the Commander in Chief's powers); (ii) that the White House nevertheless continued with the program anyway, despite DOJ's judgment that it was unlawful; (iii) that Comey, Ashcroft, the head of the FBI (Robert Mueller) and several… [read post]
15 May 2007, 4:48 am
., that it violated FISA and that the Article II argument OLC had previously approved was not an adequate justification (a conclusion prompted by the New AAG, Jack Goldsmith, having undertaken a systematic review of OLC's previous legal opinions regarding the Commander in Chief's powers); (ii) that the White House nevertheless continued with the program anyway, despite DOJ's judgment that it was unlawful; (iii) that Comey, Ashcroft, the head of the FBI (Robert Mueller) and several… [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 8:58 pm
More recently, Gregory Shill of the University of Iowa College of Law describes in The Atlantic how the law effectively compels the use of the automobile, repeating the 1977 SCOTUS reference in Wooley v. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 2:48 pm
John Reed Stark As I noted in a recent post, on June 8, 2016, the SEC, in what one commentator called “the most significant SEC cybersecurity-related action to date,” announced that Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC had agreed to pay a $1 million penalty to settle charges that as a result of its alleged failure to adopt written policies and procedures reasonably designed to protect customer data, some customer information was hacked and offered for sale online. [read post]
