Search for: "Voter v. Voter"
Results 6681 - 6700
of 6,772
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Mar 2007, 6:00 am
" (Voter Information Guide, Gen. [read post]
27 Feb 2007, 6:11 pm
MSNBC.com reports him now on record as being against Roe v. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 11:44 pm
Running as Republicans in liberal Northeastern areas, both sought to reassure pro-choice voters that they had nothing to fear from their election.Now, both seek to appease pro-life Republicans elsewhere in the country by assuring them that their views are truly conservative, that they will appoint "strict constructionist" (read anti-Roe v. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 8:53 am
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether states may constitutionally open up their primary elections to voters of all parties, voting on a common ballot, if the candidates are identified on the ballot by party. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 8:53 am
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether states may constitutionally open up their primary elections to voters of all parties, voting on a common ballot, if the candidates are identified on the ballot by party. [read post]
25 Feb 2007, 9:09 pm
They could accept the 13th amendment, but nothing past that.With 1896's Plessy v. [read post]
24 Feb 2007, 11:48 pm
He is also interested in the Consumer Reports question: why does CR get NYT v. [read post]
23 Feb 2007, 9:00 am
*In Caru, LLC. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 9:47 pm
Wallace v. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 4:27 am
The spending power also enters the picture: US v. [read post]
20 Feb 2007, 7:03 am
Abbott Laboratories (06-577). ** Whether the Constitution restricts a state's authority to limit voters' rights to put a specific issue on a ballot measure. [read post]
19 Feb 2007, 4:06 pm
Their point is to dramatize the hypocrisy of the argument---accepted by the Washington Supreme Court last July in Andersen v. [read post]
16 Feb 2007, 12:14 pm
Nakazawa v. [read post]
12 Feb 2007, 8:09 am
NLRB v. [read post]
12 Feb 2007, 4:52 am
The Court agreed, noting that the skimpy record below gave little reason to overturn the judge's decision below in denying the TRO, given the petitioner's burden to prove 1) the likelihood that the petitioner would succeed on the merits, 2) the 'balance of inconvenience' between granting or denying the TRO, 3) the petitioner would suffer irreparable injury, and 4) the public interest.The Court also rejected the petitioner's argument that Lamb v. [read post]
11 Feb 2007, 11:28 pm
Thomas offers a plausible account of why the public would be receptive to slogans like "judges should interpret the law, not make it," but I'm not persuaded that the vast majority of voters pay enough attention to questions of jurisprudence even to distinguish between the bumper sticker versions of originalism/textualism on the one hand and living constitutionalism on the other hand. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 11:01 am
Alito gave no explanation for denying the stay application (06A772, Gale v. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 3:12 am
A president's personal views on abortion are less important to abortion foes than his willingness to appoint judges and justices who understand Roe v. [read post]
5 Feb 2007, 12:23 am
Criminal Sanction Impact.01/29/07 REFERRED TO FINANCELAW / CORRECTNSS2013
MONTGOMERY -- Restricts confinement of persons separate from others in a correctional facilitySUMM : Amd SS137 & 500-k, Cor L Restricts confinement of persons separate from others in a correctional facility within a special housing unit. 01/30/07 REFERRED TO CRIME VICTIMS, CRIME AND CORRECTIONLAW / CORRECTNSS2015
MONTGOMERY -- Requires free distribution of condoms to inmatesSUMM : Add S609, Cor L Requires free,… [read post]
2 Feb 2007, 12:08 pm
A three-judge panel said a 2004 voter-approved ban on gay marriage also applies to same-sex domestic partner benefits. [read post]
