Search for: "STATE V. POWERS"
Results 5701 - 5720
of 41,389
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2022, 9:00 pm
Comer (2017); Espinoza v. [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 8:24 am
From Power Integrations v. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 6:11 am
Gonzalez v. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 6:30 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 10:40 am
Arizona v. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 4:49 am
Rice Land Partners, Ltd. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 2:50 pm
Lopez and United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 10:00 am
Arthrex, case number 19-1452; and Arthrex v. [read post]
27 Sep 2018, 4:37 pm
Following up on our recent blog post regarding the Seventh Circuit’s decision to uphold Illinois’ nuclear subsidy program, two weeks later on September 27, 2018, the Second Circuit upheld a district court’s decision finding that New York’s nuclear subsidy program was not preempted by the Federal Power Act (Coalition for Competitive Electricity, et al. v. [read post]
27 Sep 2018, 4:37 pm
Following up on our recent blog post regarding the Seventh Circuit’s decision to uphold Illinois’ nuclear subsidy program, two weeks later on September 27, 2018, the Second Circuit upheld a district court’s decision finding that New York’s nuclear subsidy program was not preempted by the Federal Power Act (Coalition for Competitive Electricity, et al. v. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 10:44 am
ALLISON V. [read post]
9 May 2012, 5:08 pm
Seabolt v. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 7:22 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Mar 2021, 5:01 am
As such, “tribes possess the common-law immunity traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers” (Oneida Indian Nation v Phillips, 981 F3d 157, 170 [2d Cir]). [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 9:57 am
Article VII Paragraph 2 of Article V is amended as follows: 1. [read post]
27 Sep 2011, 1:04 pm
” Ultimately, Justice Scalia characterized a state commandeering power as “improper. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 8:26 am
About the only thing that seems clear after the argument in Gobeille v. [read post]
12 May 2020, 4:00 am
Trump v. [read post]
1 Dec 2013, 1:47 pm
Raich, holding that the federal government’s Commerce Clause power could reach the intrastate use and possession of marijuana for medical purposes authorized under state law. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 6:10 am
” At the Yale Journal on Regulation’s Notice and Comment, Daniel Hemel discusses United States v. [read post]
