Search for: "SMITH v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,281
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jan 2024, 4:00 am
In Smith v. [read post]
24 Jan 2024, 7:35 am
In Smith v. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 9:05 pm
Department of Justice lost its bid to keep seized shark parts. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 6:20 am
State v. [read post]
17 Jan 2024, 4:44 am
Courtney Kube and Alexander Smith report for NBC News. [read post]
14 Jan 2024, 5:13 am
United States v. [read post]
12 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm
The question that the court agreed on Friday to decide in Smith v. [read post]
12 Jan 2024, 7:20 am
With this claim, Trump seeks to expand Nixon v. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
The Department of Justice does know what to do with such people. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 8:05 pm
Smith v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 11:52 am
The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Wednesday in his case, Smith v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 7:32 am
The Justice Department has long maintained that sitting presidents are temporarily immune from prosecution because criminal charges would distract them from their constitutional functions.... [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 5:42 pm
On Jan. 10, the justices will hear Smith v. [read post]
7 Jan 2024, 3:45 am
The Justice Department is likely to seek threshold grounds for dismissal, but the case could offer needed answers to a number of questions. [read post]
5 Jan 2024, 4:36 pm
Steve Matthews, who I worked very closely with in the Meese Justice Department, which appointed some libertarian conservative judges, tells me that Haley did a superb job as Governor of South Carolina, including on judicial selection. [read post]
3 Jan 2024, 7:09 am
Supreme Court, Colorado Republican State Central Committee v. [read post]
26 Dec 2023, 9:02 pm
In 1997, in Boerne v. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 10:21 am
And on Jan. 10, in Smith v. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 9:59 am
[The Justices must sua sponte address Jack Smith's lack of standing.] [read post]
20 Dec 2023, 12:00 pm
A close examination of the Justice Department's (DOJ's) organic statute makes it clear that, unlike at least four other Heads of Cabinet Departments, the Head of the Justice Department has not "in, the words of the Appointments Clause, been "by Law" *** vested" with the power to appoint inferior officers like Jack Smith who have more power than any of the 93 Senate-confirmed U.S. [read post]
