Search for: "State v. Law"
Results 4601 - 4620
of 173,814
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Apr 2023, 8:19 am
Since 2014, states have had to contend with the holding of California v. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 1:50 pm
This morning the court issued a 5-4 opinion in Janus v. [read post]
16 Mar 2016, 7:32 am
Colvin, February 22, 2016, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit More Blog Entries:Hanson v. [read post]
New Hampshire Supreme Court Reinstates Tuition Tax Credit Program But Avoids Law’s Constitutionality
2 Sep 2014, 6:57 am
The state supreme court dismissed Duncan v. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 5:31 am
Reeves (Employment Law; Exhaustion of Tribal Court Remedies)State of Kansas v. [read post]
16 Feb 2023, 8:55 am
Here is the abstract: In the 1987 decision, McCleskey v. [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 3:58 am
Long (University of Connecticut School of Law) has posted Demosprudence, Interactive Federalism, and Twenty Years of Sheff V. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 7:39 am
Corp. v. [read post]
10 Mar 2022, 12:01 am
Eugene V. [read post]
3 May 2010, 5:18 am
Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
27 Oct 2022, 7:34 am
§ 2c requires that congressional single-member districts be drawn “by law,” which embraces state courts and state constitutions, as Justice Scalia’s… Continue reading [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 3:54 am
Volokh Conspiracy: Panel on United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 6:34 am
California Public Employees Retirement System v. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 8:26 am
On June 3, 2013, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Maryland v. [read post]
30 Apr 1999, 11:00 pm
Last year, however, in Gebser v. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 8:26 am
On June 3, 2013, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Maryland v. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 10:37 pm
Copeland v. [read post]
30 Apr 1999, 11:00 pm
Last year, however, in Gebser v. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 10:14 am
On January 22, 1973, the right to a legal abortion became a federal constitution right in the United States with the Supreme Court’s decision Roe v. [read post]
5 May 2011, 10:50 am
One possibility is that, even though he thinks the FAA shouldn't apply in state courts at all, that view has been rejected by the Court and, for the sake of enforcing lower court obedience to Supreme Court law (even incorrect law), a state court that deviated on indistinguishable facts couldn't be allowed to get away with that. 4. [read post]
