Search for: "SCOTT v. UNITED STATES" Results 461 - 480 of 3,033
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 May 2021, 7:19 am by ernst
United States—then a case like Johnson v. [read post]
16 May 2021, 7:06 pm by scottgaille
I am pleased to announce my new article in this month’s edition of the Energy Law Journal: REDUCING CONFLICT AND RISK: WHY PARTIES BENEFIT FROM USING ENUMERATED ADJUSTMENT CLAUSES IN ENERGY CONSTRUCTION AND SERVICES AGREEMENTS Synopsis: As the United States transitions to more renewable energy sources, spending under energy construction and services agreements is expected to double over the next decade. [read post]
12 May 2021, 3:08 pm by Ilya Somin
Harrison filed an action against Montgomery County under the Takings Clause of the Fifth (and Fourteenth) Amendment of the United States Constitution. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 1:19 pm by John Elwood
United States, 20-559Issues: (1) Whether Feres v. [read post]
19 Apr 2021, 5:04 am by David Oscar Markus
United States, which decided that police are allowed to use minor vehicle infractions as a pretext to initiate traffic stops with the goal of investigating other possible unrelated crimes.According to an analysis of over 100 million traffic stops, Black drivers are about 40 percent more likely to be pulled over than their white counterparts. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 10:09 am
Gabriel Jackson Chin, University of California, Davis, School of Law, has published The Blueprint for Dred Scott: United States v. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 10:09 am by Christine Corcos
Gabriel Jackson Chin, University of California, Davis, School of Law, has published The Blueprint for Dred Scott: United States v. [read post]
31 Mar 2021, 9:27 pm by David Kopel
Also missing from Young is what the Supreme Court said about the right to carry in 1857's Dred Scott v. [read post]
26 Mar 2021, 1:31 am by Orin S. Kerr
  The government seizes property when it meaningfully interferes with the possessory interest in that property, a test offered in United States v. [read post]