Search for: "STATE V. POWERS"
Results 5741 - 5760
of 41,389
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Nov 2010, 8:17 am
United States as an amicus in support of the judgment below after the respondent in the case, the United States, conceded that the petitioner has standing to challenge her conviction on the ground that the law under which she was convicted exceeds Congress’s powers. [read post]
18 Feb 2023, 9:45 am
This Court's decision in United States v. [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 1:55 pm
Related Cases: United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 7:23 am
As Justice Felix Frankfurter famously noted in his dissent in Baker v. [read post]
1 May 2013, 5:06 am
Ireland, TV Vest v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 1:39 pm
State, supra.In Ake v. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 7:41 am
See United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 5:36 am
“Isn’t legislative power nondelegable? [read post]
9 Oct 2011, 2:06 pm
Oregon State Treasurer v. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 6:00 am
What we have is a police state trying to control the population by discovering and then reeducating (or eradicating) those who think in ways contrary to the wishes of the controlling and powerful few. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 9:29 am
Its claim upsets regional stability and portends a coming conflict with the United States, the world’s supreme maritime power, over the application of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). [read post]
16 Apr 2014, 8:30 am
United States. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 6:27 am
See Pascale v. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 6:27 am
See Pascale v. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V Neither of the contracting Parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizens or subjects under the stipulations of this convention. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 9:31 am
" Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 11:23 pm
Per Vaughn v. [read post]
4 Apr 2007, 4:30 pm
This absurd decision, Massachusetts v. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 3:54 pm
Castro-Huerta--Rebalancing federal-state-tribal power. [read post]
27 Oct 2015, 10:26 am
”)While recognizing a very narrow preclusive presidential power that prohibits Congress from contradicting a position the President has previously taken on the political recognition of a foreign government, the Zivotofsky Court calls into fatal question its 1936 discussion in United States v. [read post]
