Search for: "People v. Orin"
Results 541 - 560
of 580
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2020, 1:20 pm
Naffe v. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 10:23 am
As Article V of the Constitution says, the Amendments “shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 9:47 am
State v. [read post]
1 Feb 2021, 12:42 pm
(Andrew Auernheimer was represented by, inter alia, frequent Lawfare contributor and computer crime scholar Orin Kerr.) [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 8:54 am
Wickard v. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 9:05 am
Orin Kerr writes in the Volokh Conspiracy about the Eleventh Circuit’s decision yesterday in United States v. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 6:55 am
” Kerr analyzes the reply brief in one such case—City of Ontario v. [read post]
20 May 2009, 9:00 pm
In the 1987 case New York v. [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 9:17 am
Read on and find out......Kuvin v. [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 5:56 am
Chief Justice Roberts, on the other hand, made a huge splash with his judicial noir dissent to the court's refusal to grant cert to another case, Pennsylvania v. [read post]
15 Sep 2020, 7:32 am
Davis, and NLRB v. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 11:00 am
To begin with, as Orin Kerr has noted, third party data holders generally cannot assert a Constitutional protection on behalf of their customers. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 4:19 pm
Gore — and there are going to be some people who are really really upset with whatever we do, so not eagerly jump in. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 7:53 am
See California v. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 2:26 pm
Lujan v. [read post]
29 May 2019, 12:38 pm
I'm also quite sure there are examples of blog posts or other online media having an effect on Supreme Court arguments or opinions, though I'm not sure that all of the examples documented in the article—Walter Dellinger's comments on NPR, the federalism argument in U.S. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2022, 12:30 pm
So writes The Onion in an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to take up Novak v. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am
Today, for reasons both technological and political, there is an increasing divergence and growing conflict between U.S. and foreign laws that compel, and prohibit, production of data in response to governmental surveillance directives.[1][2] Major U.S. telecommunications and Internet providers[3] face escalating pressure from foreign governments, asserting foreign law, to require production of data stored by the providers in the United States, in ways that violate U.S. law.[4] At the… [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 5:01 am
The major point is this: Bragg is sketching a lot of different predicates involving a lot of different people. [read post]
17 Sep 2013, 6:03 pm
The Fourth Amendment does not bar the government’s proposed collection of telephony metadata, she writes, because the production “is squarely controlled by” Smith v. [read post]
