Search for: "State v. Congress"
Results 4881 - 4900
of 29,288
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jul 2013, 5:29 am
” United States v. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 8:06 am
The case was Scott v. [read post]
13 Mar 2022, 9:01 pm
S. ___ (2020); Wise v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 10:11 am
Yesterday in CTS Corp. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2021, 6:07 am
United States Dep't of Labor, 477 F. [read post]
28 Jul 2020, 5:00 am
Jones v. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 5:22 pm
(Here's my April 2010 post on Hoang v. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 9:06 am
The case, Zimmerman v. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 8:30 am
After the case (Barker v. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 10:00 am
Indeed, this conception has probably been the most common understanding for almost a century.That may have been the framers intentions, and it works well in explaining the recent past, particularly since the New Deal, but struggles as an explanation once we remember that Congress only rarely exercised its powers under the Bankruptcy Clause for almost a century after the Nation’s founding.It also neglects the understanding of the Bankruptcy Clause that developed shortly after… [read post]
7 Feb 2015, 12:01 am
But if in fact the instructions issued in Georgia v. [read post]
24 Jan 2008, 7:21 am
BPMC v. [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 4:09 am
See United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 12:30 pm
United States, a state or local law is preempted if it “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress. [read post]
3 Mar 2020, 9:01 pm
But query whether in the federalism context, where other plain-statement rules such as that announced in 1991 in Gregory v Ashcroft (which requires Congress to clearly say in the text of a regulatory statute that the statute applies to state and local government entities before states can be required to obey) seem designed to make sure Congress has carefully considered state interests, Congress itself has to be the one to fix any… [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 11:20 am
There's also the issue that Copyright Act damages are set by Congress, rather than awarded pursuant to state law, and a court's scrutiny of a statutory damages range set by Congress raises separation of powers issues. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 9:56 am
" Rather, the Second Amendment means that it shall not be infringed any further by Congress, as opposed to the States. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 10:11 am
It is not clear what Congress may have intended by the state exchange subsidy limitation. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 4:53 pm
Texas Department of Housing Affairs v. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 8:37 am
" See, e.g., Marshall v. [read post]
