Search for: "United States v. Heard" Results 5261 - 5280 of 8,393
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Mar 2013, 10:05 am by Katerina Linos and Kim Twist
Sebelius) and Arizona’s immigration restrictions (United States v. [read post]
7 Mar 2013, 9:34 am by Trey Childress
  McKesson brought an action before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and, after much back and forth (the court of appeals has heard the case five times!) [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 10:44 am by Ken
In my post about Prenda Law's defamation lawsuits, I mentioned that Prenda is facing an inquiry by United States District Judge Otis Wright in Los Angeles. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 2:37 pm by The Federalist Society
On February 26, 2013,  the Supreme Court heard the oral argument in Maryland v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 2:37 pm by The Federalist Society
On February 26, 2013,  the Supreme Court heard the oral argument in Maryland v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 9:44 am by Florian Mueller
It was the first pro-FRAND ruling by an Asian court that I've ever heard of. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 8:09 am by Gene Quinn
By: Gene Quinn (IPWatchdog.com) Last week, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the matter of Bowman v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 7:00 am by Beth Graham
Last week, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in American Express Corp. v. [read post]
4 Mar 2013, 6:38 am by The Federalist Society
On February 26, 2013, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Peugh v United States. [read post]
4 Mar 2013, 6:38 am by The Federalist Society
On February 26, 2013, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Peugh v United States. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 2:59 pm by Oyez Project
United States Shelby County v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 1:27 pm by Rory Little
  But in 2005, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 11:56 am
United States, also heard by the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Feb. 26th., has flown well under the radar thus far," ScotusBlog's Rory Little posted Mon, February 25th., "but at issue is no less than the appropriate constitutional test for identifying an 'ex post facto' law. [read post]