Search for: "MICHAEL v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"
Results 521 - 540
of 1,371
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 May 2019, 8:11 am
By a 7-2 margin (meaning it won the support of Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan), the court summarily reversed the U.S. [read post]
29 May 2019, 6:59 am
In April, the U.S. [read post]
26 May 2019, 7:48 am
The second covers the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Pepper v. [read post]
26 May 2019, 7:48 am
The second covers the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Pepper v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 7:12 am
The en banc U.S. [read post]
18 May 2019, 5:16 am
Andrew Kent supplied additional Justice Department precedent in support of Mueller’s obstruction theory. [read post]
16 May 2019, 4:12 am
At Justia’s Verdict blog, Michael Dorf writes that “[a]lthough the majority opinion repeatedly invoked Founding-era sources, … it nonetheless departed sharply from the brand of originalism that Justice [Clarence] Thomas and his fellow conservatives purport to favor. [read post]
15 May 2019, 7:21 pm
I am delighted to announce the publication of "Next Generation Law: Data-Driven Governance and Accountability Based Regulatory Systems in the West, and Social Credit Regimes in China," Law &: Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 28(1): 123-172 (2018).In the contemporary world, compliance systems and policing are quickly replacing law and the traditional methods of enforcement (either organic or positive law) as the framework through which collectives (the state, the… [read post]
11 May 2019, 7:18 am
Another decision is Public Citizen v. [read post]
9 May 2019, 6:20 am
In a 5-4 decision authored by Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, the U.S. [read post]
6 May 2019, 12:05 pm
McFadden, 18-7277 Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. [read post]
6 May 2019, 9:41 am
Both the Supreme Court in the seminal Reno v. [read post]
6 May 2019, 6:12 am
At Oral Argument Arguing Counsel Michael J. [read post]
27 Apr 2019, 7:00 am
The Justice Department Touhy regulations, for example, state that “no present or former employee of the Department of Justice may testify or produce Departmental records in response to subpoenas or demands of courts or other authorities issued in any state or federal proceeding without obtaining prior approval by an appropriate Department official. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 12:46 am
Cupp, 394 U.S. 731, 89 S. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 5:17 pm
U.S. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 5:00 am
The Report explained that regulations of the U.S. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 2:20 pm
But the President had decided to fire Comey before hearing from the Department of Justice. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 2:42 pm
The U.S. [read post]
