Search for: "Degree v. United States" Results 5481 - 5500 of 6,533
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2021, 3:58 am by Fred Rocafort
For instance, tariffs on components for products made in the United States may be eliminated, as well as products made by the China operations of US companies. [read post]
24 Jul 2024, 11:56 am by Angelina Kushnarova
Naga Bhushan graduated from IIT Madras in 1989 with a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 10:04 am by Karel Frielink
Press release In today’s Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Delfi AS v. [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 10:33 am by Eugene Volokh
  In support of this contention, Jason relies on the recent United States Supreme Court decisions recognizing an individual’s right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 5:05 pm by INFORRM
Google v Louis Vuitton C-236/08 which considered the degree of ‘neutrality’ on the part of an intermediary. [read post]
22 Nov 2006, 3:45 am
Click here to view both marks.On Thursday 14 December the Advocate General gives his Opinion in Case C-273/05 P Celltech R&D Ltd v OHIM. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 6:09 am by Robert A. Epstein
  The due process guarantee expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires assurance of fundamental fairness during legal proceedings. [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 9:00 pm by Austin Sarat
Executions in the United States frequently go seriously wrong. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 7:54 am by Joseph Kearney
Resources in the United States are generally held as private property, which gives the owner the right to exclude others. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 12:13 pm
Yesterday, almost two years after hearing arguments, the Supreme Court of South Carolina finally issued its decision in the case of The Protestant Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, et al. v. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 2:39 pm by Josh Blackman
The President of the United States withdrew, and the Senate adjourned. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 9:06 am by Matthew Davie
The issues were: (1) whether ECHR Article 8 was engaged; (2) whether the SWP’s activities were “in accordance with the law”; and (3) whether the SWP’s activities were “necessary in a democratic society” in the interests of one of the objectives stated in Article 8(2), in accordance with the four-part test set out by the UK Supreme Court in Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) [2014] AC 700. [read post]