Search for: "People v. Polite"
Results 581 - 600
of 13,557
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Sep 2020, 12:51 pm
In Illinois Republican Party v. [read post]
28 May 2009, 3:45 am
It may be politically useful that her opinion isn't known, and yet that may mean that she'll turn out to be a surprise (as Souter, the man she's replacing was in his time).None of the cases in Judge Sotomayor's record dealt directly with the legal theory underlying Roe v. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 7:09 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Sep 2020, 3:00 pm
But we also know full well that just because you've once committed a crime, that also doesn't necessarily mean that you're currently a criminal or shouldn't possess the most basic political right of having a minimal say on the identity of the political leaders entitled to govern you. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 11:00 am
Within the U.S., this could have significant political ramifications. [read post]
16 May 2010, 12:33 pm
GREGORY: Just remind people, this was about political contributions.No, it wasn't! [read post]
4 Jul 2015, 8:27 pm
We have agreed that some symbols, cross burnings for example (Virginia v. [read post]
25 Sep 2007, 12:34 pm
Few cases the Court might have agreed to hear would be likely to have as much real-world political impact as the newly granted cases of Crawford v. [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 2:03 am
The partisan gerrymandering proposal asks courts to make it easier for the people to have a say in the districting process. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 3:01 am
American developments in politics and law have recognized that, as the Court observed in Reynolds v. [read post]
13 Aug 2015, 3:58 am
The post Beijing v. [read post]
19 Nov 2008, 7:10 pm
California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927): Whitney v. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 9:48 am
here, the "political divisiveness along religious lines" argument in church-state law has always been wrong: Nearly thirty-five years ago, in Lemon v. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 4:18 pm
The case which has most recently looked at section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (RPA) is Watkins v Woolas ([2010] EWHC 2702(QB)). [read post]
18 Aug 2023, 6:13 am
" Likewise, Rosenblatt v. [read post]
17 Nov 2018, 2:47 pm
Recap Here are the results for the 11 people most closely tied to FOSTA: Didn’t face reelection: 4 Lost reelection: 4 (I’m counting Sen. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 12:13 pm
Was politics the poison or the antidote? [read post]
24 Oct 2008, 1:08 pm
Dorf applauds the unanimous Court's ability to ignore (implicitly, unlike Bush v. [read post]
5 May 2022, 5:48 am
It has not printed "pregnant people" since last November, in "If Roe v. [read post]
6 May 2015, 7:52 am
In 2010 in Carey v. [read post]
