Search for: "People v Connor"
Results 541 - 560
of 1,127
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jun 2022, 9:01 pm
In his concurrence to Webster v. [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 10:40 am
” County of Sacramento v. [read post]
2 Apr 2018, 2:30 pm
” Blow cites the 1989 case of Graham v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 10:04 am
The less aggressive redistricting plans adopted this cycle show that even strong partisans have absorbed the lesson that if you create a bunch of 53 percent districts you can lose them when your side’s support goes down by 4 or 5 percent.Justice O'Connor said it best in the original political gerrymandering case, Davis v. [read post]
8 May 2014, 9:01 pm
When the Supreme Court in Schuette v. [read post]
6 Mar 2007, 7:56 am
Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989) ("other seizure" to trigger the Fourth Amendment and its "reasonableness" standard) and County of Sacramento v. [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 7:02 am
In Walker v. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 8:04 am
After her death, it transpired that Mrs YB had made two further wills, leaving the flat to other people. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 9:29 pm
Writing for the majority of the Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 11:51 pm
All too often, as in Gonzales v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 6:56 am
" One of only 2 examples they give is Gonzales v. [read post]
13 Nov 2008, 12:01 am
Evans (and for that matter, City of Cleburne v. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 11:04 am
But, as Greenhouse puts it, “The same facts can speak very differently to different people–and to different judges. [read post]
18 Jul 2018, 1:08 pm
But last fall Kavanaugh provided at least a little insight into his views on Roe v. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 1:06 pm
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announcing the court’s opinion in Grutter v. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 9:41 am
Maybe more than Ledbetter – which would have come out differently had Sandra O’Connor still been on the Court, but at least it didn’t overturn a precedent – I’d cite Gonzales v. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 11:42 am
In Caperton v. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 4:26 pm
Canada In the case of Roberts v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 8:37 am
Buentello v. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 5:01 am
Janus didn't discuss Turner or PruneYard, and mentioned Rumsfeld only for the narrow proposition that "government may not 'impose penalties or withhold benefits based on membership in a disfavored group' where doing so 'ma[kes] group membership less attractive.'"[134] And the compelled contribution cases, of which Janus is the most recent, have drawn a line between compelling people to fund the views expressed by a particular private speaker (such as the… [read post]