Search for: "South Dakota v. Dole"
Results 41 - 60
of 73
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2012, 5:19 pm
In contrast, the monies are issue in South Dakota v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 8:40 am
This strikes me as a fairly reasonable gloss on the case of South Dakota v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 6:05 am
If that doesn’t happen, the Medicaid case is going to be an extremely important ruling no matter who wins; probably the most important Spending Clause case since the 1930s, or at least since South Dakota v. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 7:30 am
In cases such as South Dakota v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 8:25 pm
Dole, but I note that South Dakota v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 4:05 am
Participating States must also comply with various other requirements, including those that protect against waste, fraud, and abuse; those that protect the health and safety, and the privacy, of Medicaid beneficiaries; those that ensure that the States adequately accomplish the goals of the program (see the recent decision in Douglas v. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 9:02 pm
The Steward Machine comment was picked up by the Supreme Court 50 years later when the Court, in the case of South Dakota v. [read post]
26 Dec 2011, 9:28 pm
This is one of a continuing series of articles the blog has been publishing in recent weeks, explaining more fully the new federal health care law, and the Supreme Court’s review of the constitutionality of key parts of the law. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 10:26 am
When Chief Justice Rehnquist authored South Dakota v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 1:18 pm
The question squarely presented in that grant is whether the Medicaid expansion that is part of the optimistically named "Affordable Care Act" is void because it is coercive, under the framework established by South Dakota v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 9:45 am
., v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 7:10 pm
Sebelius Docket: 11-400 Issue: (1) Whether Congress exceeds its enumerated powers and violate basic principles of federalism when it coerces states into accepting onerous conditions that it could not impose directly by threatening to withhold all federal funding under the single largest grant-in-aid program, or whether the limitation on Congress‘s spending power that this Court recognized in South Dakota v. [read post]
9 Aug 2011, 4:13 pm
Lopez and United States v. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 12:28 pm
United States (1992), and United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 4:59 pm
Regarding conditional federal grants, in 1987 in South Dakota v. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 8:24 am
South Dakota v. [read post]
28 Dec 2010, 5:36 am
Given the space limitations of a newspaper op-ed page, it is perhaps understandable that the discussion does not quite persuasively distinguish the 7-2 South Dakota v. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 9:22 pm
Here is the abstract: The Spending Clause has been interpreted to grant extremely broad discretion for Congress to offer conditional grants to the states - most recently in South Dakota v. [read post]
23 Oct 2010, 5:28 am
Under South Dakota v. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 4:26 am
Under South Dakota v. [read post]
