Search for: "State of Montana v. United States" Results 581 - 600 of 1,060
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Aug 2012, 1:38 pm by Steven Berk
No arguments were heard and the decision boils down to: “The question presented in this case is whether the holding of Citizens United applies to the Montana state law. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 4:44 am
United Illuminating, 1998 WL 910271, at *10 (Conn. [read post]
18 Jun 2024, 7:50 am by Evan George
”   The constitutional language  While many states have strong environmental protections, only three states have passed what is technically considered a “green amendment”: Pennsylvania, Montana, and New York. [read post]
30 May 2020, 5:29 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe (Indian Gaming) Federal Courts Bulletinhttps://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2020.html United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 12:05 pm by Jimmy Verner
Holding “that the right to travel guaranteed by the United States Constitution includes the right to travel within Montana,” the Montana Supreme Court reversed a trial court decision changing custody to the father when the mother wanted to move from Terry to Kalispell, a distance of about 700 miles. [read post]
4 May 2010, 10:04 am by Alison Rowe
 The conference had a record number of attendees--180 practitioners from all over the United States. [read post]
5 Jun 2016, 9:01 pm by Ronald D. Rotunda
The Montana Supreme Court explicitly rejected Citizens United and refused to invalidate this state law. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 5:00 am by Victoria VanBuren
Wachsmuth forthcoming Fall 2010) and the author of numerous law review articles on the topic of arbitration, several of which have been repeatedly cited to the United States Supreme Court and lower state and federal appellate courts. [read post]
24 Feb 2012, 6:54 am by Joshua Matz
Discussing oral argument in United States v. [read post]
Eleven states (Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, Oklahoma and West Virginia) explicitly limit the total number of ballots an individual may deliver, notarize or authorize on behalf of voters. [read post]