Search for: "Young v. State" Results 6241 - 6260 of 8,037
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2016, 4:15 pm by INFORRM
In Willow v Information Commissioner & Ministry of Justice this week the Upper Tribunal considered at the question of restraint techniques used in young offender institutions and secure training centres. [read post]
10 Jan 2015, 3:33 pm by Lucy Reed
These are plainly the actions of an emotionally upset young lady. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 9:30 pm by Mitra Sharafi
For instance, a 1930s High Court judge named Douglas Young put up considerable resistance to a distinctively colonial provision of criminal procedure that endangered defendants' right to a fair trial. [read post]
15 Feb 2021, 7:56 am by Eric Goldman
The Ninth Circuit emphatically rejected the state action argument in PragerU v. [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
This term, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in Jones v. [read post]
2 Jun 2022, 11:00 am by Sandy Levinson
will enjoy them more than being asked if the regulation of mudflaps by state X can be said to violate the Commerce Clause.. [read post]
5 Jan 2018, 1:43 pm by Mark Ashton
”  Father’s response is equally naive, suggesting that a child this young might benefit from a one year on/one year off arrangement on two different continents. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 3:19 pm by David Lat
A young lawyer by the name of Adam Gustafson — a 2009 graduate of the Yale Law School and former vice president of the Yale Federalist Society, who’s currently clerking in Hawaii for Judge Richard Clifton (9th Cir.) [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 10:01 am
The constitutional importance of this point is clear: in R (on the application of Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which was cited by Lord Pannick on behalf of Gina Miller during his oral submissions, Lord Hoffmann held that ‘the unique authority Parliament derives from its representative character’. [read post]
17 Sep 2012, 4:20 pm
Plessy v Ferguson in 1896 held that despite the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, a state law requiring separate railroad cars for blacks and whites was constitutional as long as the cars were physically the same. [read post]