Search for: "United States v. State of Washington" Results 6321 - 6340 of 9,057
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2021, 1:53 pm by Lydia Estep
Since Colorado and Washington first legalized the recreational use of cannabis in 2012, an avalanche (pun intended) of other states soon followed. [read post]
17 May 2010, 7:19 pm
Fallback B, Part 2: The case of Citizens United v. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 2:23 pm
Burke, United States Senate Election, Expulsion, and Censure Cases, 1793-1990 421-425 (Washington, D.C.: G.P.O., 1995). [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 8:02 am by Chris Castle
Foreign data protection, privacy, and other laws and regulations can be more restrictive than those in the United States. [read post]
18 Dec 2015, 8:22 am by Daniel Hemel
Meanwhile, one provision in the package that has drawn little attention so far could have significant implications for the United States Tax Court. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 9:05 pm by Claire Hill
Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
7 Oct 2016, 2:40 pm
Tracermarks have become important (for example in Washington's marijuana business regulation)--tracing sourcing in supply chains (GMA [read post]
6 Jul 2020, 9:44 am by Schachtman
Of course, there are such lobbyists, but the description misses one of the most powerful groups, the plaintiffs’ mass tort trial bar, the largest rent-seeking group in the United States. [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 11:18 am
Let's just say the documentation around CTA's receipt of AutoCAD seemed murky. 9th Circuit cases: As far as applicable Ninth Circuit precedent, the court found an answer favorable to Vernor in United States v. [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 12:39 am by INFORRM
The claim relates to two instances in which Cadwalladr accused the businessman of lying about his relationship with the Russian state. [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 7:55 pm
Pat Gudridge: Davenport v. [read post]
17 May 2007, 4:49 pm
"Now, imagine you are the CEO or General Counsel of a telcom company that has been assisting the NSA in electronic surveillance for two years, assured that what appear to be your violations of FISA do not subject you to legal exposure because you have been relying on the certification "by the Attorney General of the United States that no warrant or court order is required by law. [read post]