Search for: "Citizen v. Johnson*"
Results 621 - 640
of 1,077
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Mar 2014, 12:56 pm
Unfortunately, last June, the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 12:41 pm
White v. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 10:00 am
Hood v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 7:53 am
(Citing Arbor Hill Concerned Citizens Neighborhood Ass'n v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 10:01 am
SeeAckley v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 7:38 am
According to the lead opinion, the religious exemption applied here is constitutionally permissible as well (Ockletree v Franciscan Health System dba St. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 10:50 am
This is an issue worth fighting for, as the recent order in Sherfey v. [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 7:47 am
Feiner v. [read post]
22 Jan 2014, 4:39 am
See Johnson-Bey v. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 5:58 pm
In 2011 the EEOC determined in Veretto v. [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 7:21 am
The Eleventh Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, held that Lane was not testifying as a citizen on a matter of public concern, and thus could not stake out a First Amendment retaliation claim. [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 11:14 am
Black had served as Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and while there he had issued a fascinating decision called Sharpless v. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 9:08 am
Westrick v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
I thought African-Americans were citizens! [read post]
20 Dec 2013, 7:10 am
Fortino v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 10:22 pm
The two plaintiffs in Klayman v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 8:00 am
South is of course far larger and more wide-ranging than just the direct legacy of Brown v. [read post]
24 Nov 2013, 4:00 am
CARTER v. [read post]
22 Nov 2013, 7:34 am
A Muslim employee who was a French citizen, and whose supervisors allegedly expressed hostility toward her national origin, race, religion and pregnancy during her five-year tenure at the French Embassy in Washington D.C. [read post]
20 Nov 2013, 4:48 am
The Court of Appeals began its analysis of Johnson’s argument on appeal by noting that [the] 4th Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches or seizures . . . is implicated in certain situations when foreign officials conduct searches targeting American citizens in foreign countries, U.S. v. [read post]
