Search for: "STATE v. STEVENS"
Results 5861 - 5880
of 7,829
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Mar 2010, 7:49 am
(Again, collection is state-specific, and apart from the analysis of the nature of domain names, the outcome in these cases turns on the statute in question, which vary from state to state. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 7:20 am
Adam Winkler at ACSblog hones in on questions by Justice Stevens regarding whether the Second Amendment might apply differently against the federal and state governments. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 12:52 am
" Johnson v. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 12:31 am
This approach was on display during the dense and complex arguments in Samantar v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm
Arguing on behalf of the state, Michigan Solicitor General Eric Restuccia began by emphasizing the Court’s decision in North Carolina v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 2:06 pm
Dix Professor Steven Calabresi moderates the discussion. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 7:40 am
United States, and Mac’s Shell Service, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 4:39 am
Delaware Chancery Court Finally Rules in Selectica Below is news from Steven Haas of Hunton & Williams (we are posting memos analyzing this decision in our DealLawyers.com "Poison Pills" Practice Area): On Friday, the Delaware Court of Chancery issued its long-awaited opinion in Selectica v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 3:48 am
As a rule, the Justices only invoke history when it is consistent with views they already hold.Justice Stevens channeled Justice Frankfurter, arguing that perhaps incorporation to the states did not incorporate the whole right, but just its core elements. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 5:14 pm
Justice Stevens’ suggestion that the Second Amendment should not be incorporated jot-for-jot is a bad idea. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 8:39 am
Delaware Chancery Court Finally Rules in Selectica Below is news from Steven Haas of Hunton & Williams (we are posting memos analyzing this decision in our "Poison Pills" Practice Area): On Friday, the Delaware Court of Chancery issued its long-awaited opinion in Selectica v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 8:26 am
The eagerly awaited oral argument in McDonald, et al., v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 7:36 am
United States No. 08-103, Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 3:56 am
See, e.g., Henry v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 7:00 am
” David Hudson, analyzing United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 4:50 am
Friday, we looked at Florida v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 7:09 am
Shatzer and Florida v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 5:00 am
But as Justice Stevens says in dissent [T]he catchall clause does not meaningfully clarify Powell’s rights. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 11:20 am
Heller applies to the states. [read post]
