Search for: "State v. Congress" Results 6681 - 6700 of 29,295
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Apr 2012, 1:37 pm by Michael M. O'Hear
Since Teague, however, Congress has erected a host of new statutory obstacles that federal courts must overcome before upsetting state-court judgments. [read post]
11 May 2022, 1:09 pm by David Bernstein
The State argues that statements in the Thirty-ninth Congress about the time of the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment indicate that the Framers did not intend the Amendment to make unconstitutional state miscegenation laws. [read post]
5 Jan 2024, 6:40 pm by Mark Tushnet
It too would be determined in each state by the state's own processes, subject perhaps to the possibility, flagged in the literature on Powell v. [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 9:24 am
The EPA has neither relied on factors which Congress did not intend it to consider nor failed to consider any important aspect of the problem. . . [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 6:17 am by Michael M. O'Hear
Just in time for exam-writing law professors comes the Seventh Circuit’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 12:22 pm by Bruce Zagaris
  The State Department notified Congress that the Executive Branch intends to impose sanctions against Russia in a number of respects. [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 12:22 pm by Bruce Zagaris
  The State Department notified Congress that the Executive Branch intends to impose sanctions against Russia in a number of respects. [read post]
10 May 2023, 1:55 pm by NARF
Federal Courts Bulletinhttps://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2023.html United States v. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 3:31 pm
Au contraire - at issue in Zuni Public School District v. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 8:00 am
Congress has had numerous opportunities to state its will. [read post]
2 Aug 2017, 7:00 am by Ed Stein
And as the Supreme Court held the 1983 case Immigration and Naturalization Service v. [read post]
19 Apr 2018, 6:04 am by Scott R. Anderson, Molly E. Reynolds
And there’s a good reason for that: “legislative vetoes” and other conditional authorizations that try to circumvent the normal legislative process are generally seen as unconstitutional under the Supreme Court’s 1983 decision in INS v. [read post]