Search for: "Howard v. United States (two Cases)" Results 41 - 60 of 770
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jan 2018, 4:18 am by Edith Roberts
United States (consolidated with two other cases), in which the court will consider the effect of the dual-officeholder ban on military judges. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 5:21 am by Amy Howe
Briefly: In The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse discusses last week’s grant in the two cell phone privacy cases, United States v. [read post]
11 Dec 2015, 6:16 am
Goldstein, 6 NY3d 119 [Court of Appeals of New York [2005]. . .; accord Matter of State of New York v. [read post]
18 Nov 2023, 4:28 am by Mark Graber
  Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan asserted, “where a person has taken a solemn oath to support the Constitution of the United States there is a fair moral implication that he cannot afterward commit an act which in its effect would destroy the Constitution of the United States without incurring the guilt of at least moral perjury. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 3:43 am by Amy Howe
Yesterday the Court heard oral argument in two cases:  Ocasio v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 5:49 am by Robert Brammer
Several of his rulings eventually reached the Supreme Court on appeal, such as the Pentagon Papers case, United States v. [read post]
25 Nov 2016, 7:23 am
Howard, supra.In his appeal, Howard made two arguments:1) The jury's verdict in this case was against the weight of the evidence.2) The court erred in admitting the text messages since they were not authenticated by law enforcement as being those of the defendant in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence901.Commonwealth v. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 7:00 am by Kali Borkoski
In other news about cases from this Term, the National Law Journal interviews Elizabeth Wydra of the Constitutional Accountability Center about two of this Term’s federal preemption cases, AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 6:30 am by Dan Ernst
Thus, when Jacob Howard named Corfield and the enumerated rights of Article IV as “privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,” he and his audience understood the limited relative nature of those rights. [read post]