Search for: "Small v. People" Results 6141 - 6160 of 8,519
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Feb 2019, 9:17 am
  The object remains the same, inflaming passions, or in the drier language of the administrator of the engagement of the (voting or focus group relevant) masses might say, to lead people to an appropriate understanding of events and their implications. [read post]
7 May 2011, 5:56 am by Rebecca Tushnet
That’s fine for a book, but we’ve seen stock crashes triggered by bot v. bot, and that is a problem. [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 1:35 pm by SCOTUSblog
And those three rows have small desktops that run the length of the press section. [read post]
17 Oct 2018, 4:00 am by Ken Chasse
Does any of them have a program the purpose of which is to solve the A2J problem that is the unaffordability of legal services for the majority of the population that is middle and lower income people? [read post]
1 May 2007, 8:41 pm
Mention of ‘we the people' in the Preamble and the will of the people in passing a law are certainly relevant considerations but are not decisive in constitutional adjudication of the validity of the law in question. [read post]
6 May 2011, 7:16 am by David Lat
But when we do have both sides available to us, we present them.In the case of the People v. [read post]
17 Mar 2009, 6:10 am
That robe means as much as a kid's Halloween costume.Same way with small-time criminal work. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm by John Dean
Supreme Court resolved this landmark case in 1964, New York Times v. [read post]
16 Oct 2021, 1:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
A report released during WWII noted that “Most people in this country [i.e., the U.S.], including educated people, know little or nothing about our overseas possessions. [read post]
21 Jun 2015, 6:18 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
A small price to pay to keep a country safe – if money is spent wisely. [read post]
1 May 2022, 2:54 pm by Ilya Somin
While there is an extensive literature arguing for paternalistic interferencewith people's consumption choices, little has been said on behalf of paternalistic interference with people's voting choices. [read post]
22 Sep 2015, 7:00 am by Amy Howe
  To her, the Court’s 2012 decision in Fisher v. [read post]