Search for: "Session v. State" Results 5501 - 5520 of 6,592
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Oct 2009, 3:13 am
Last week, in State v. [read post]
21 Jul 2024, 1:26 am by Frank Cranmer
Saïla Ouald-Chaib, Strasbourg Observers: Mikyas v Belgium: one more ‘headscarf case’ that manifestly fails to acknowledge applicants’ concerns. [read post]
22 May 2015, 3:55 pm
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made it clear this week that, while the Senate is rapidly approaching recess, the Senate “will stay in [session] until a deal is struck to extend” the Patriot Act. [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 10:35 am by Schachtman
Federal and State Prosecutions against Physicians and Screening Companies After Judge Jack’s exposé of fraudulent and false diagnoses in the silicosis MDL, various news media reported that the United States Attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York was investigating possible criminal charges against the physicians and lawyers who orchestrated the screenings. [read post]
22 Feb 2021, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
This column will develop these two perspectives.Easier to DefendSince the Supreme Court decided Roe v. [read post]
29 Jan 2012, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
The session on Thursday morning with Google’s legal director, Daphne Keller, and head of corporate communications in Europe, David-John (DJ) Collins, provided a useful insight into the search giant’s handling of legal complaints. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 5:29 am
 Finally, Lauren V. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 9:20 am by Lyle Denniston
  Moreover, the Court has already released its argument schedule for all sittings through the February session. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 11:30 pm by Wessen Jazrawi
The legislation will be introduced in the 2013/14 parliamentary session. [read post]
4 Jul 2023, 10:27 am by John Floyd
Making race-based jury selection decisions in violation of Batson v. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 2:52 pm by Ilya Somin
He also explains that if the administration withholds the full range of grants potentially covered by the order and referenced in statements by administration officials, such withholding would be “coercive” under NFIB v. [read post]