Search for: "Clinton v. Clinton"
Results 621 - 640
of 3,308
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jul 2019, 7:15 am
In City of Los Angeles v. [read post]
13 Jul 2019, 1:05 pm
Judge Tatel indicates his view that this case is closer to Clinton v. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 9:36 am
The census citizenship question case (New York et al. v Dep't of Commerce, back in the SDNY after remand from the Supreme Court in June) has taken a strange new turn. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 7:22 pm
Neither did Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 2:55 pm
In Bi v. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 4:00 am
Matter of Burke v Bowen, 40 NY2d 264, 266-267 [1976]; cf. [read post]
4 Jul 2019, 8:32 pm
STANZIANO V. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 5:50 am
July 1, 2019Jordan v. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 9:01 pm
So too, in Flowers v. [read post]
28 Jun 2019, 8:34 am
Related Cases: Lexmark v. [read post]
28 Jun 2019, 8:30 am
Among the cases he worked on in the 1953 term was Barsky v. [read post]
28 Jun 2019, 6:07 am
Hajec is Director of Litigation at the Immigration Reform Law Institute, which filed an amicus brief in support of the administration in Department of Commerce v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 2:18 pm
(The first was by President Clinton.) [read post]
10 Jun 2019, 9:56 am
Arora v. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court held in Bowles v. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 7:30 am
But I continue to believe that the 1968 and 1992 elections, to mention only two especially significant post-World War II elections (and not, for example, the 1912 or 1860 elections), present their own problems inasmuch as the two winners, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, had the demonstrated support of only 43% of the population, and, of course, were faced as well by a “divided” Congress in which at least one house was controlled by the opposition party. [read post]
2 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm
And if he is subpoenaed to testify before Congress, a strong argument can be made that he can, and should, say more.A 2000 DOJ Opinion, on which I worked while I was a deputy in the Office of Legal Counsel, reaffirmed a Watergate-era DOJ determination that criminally prosecuting a sitting President would violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers, even after the Supreme Court decided in Clinton v. [read post]
31 May 2019, 6:00 am
Apart from his ACA decisions, in his dissent in Obergefell v. [read post]
[Ilya Somin] Vox Symposium on Whether a Sitting President Can be Indicted and Prosecuted for a Crime
30 May 2019, 12:59 pm
The idea that a sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution is also at odds with the Supreme Court's 1997 ruling in Clinton v. [read post]
