Search for: "State v. Close" Results 661 - 680 of 31,630
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Apr 2023, 12:10 pm
(Justices Ginsberg and Stevens, neither of whom, I might add, remain either on the Court or breathing).Given that the Supreme Court has indisputably said that primaries have to be closed if that's what the party wants, the plaintiff's argument here that it's unconstitutional for a state to allow primaries to be closed is a surefire loser. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 3:33 pm by David Gans
EMA, concerning the constitutionality of state regulation of violent video games, and McComish v. [read post]
14 May 2017, 1:56 pm by NCC Staff
On May 14, 1973, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Frontiero v. [read post]
28 Apr 2017, 6:14 am by Joe Koncelik
   Both Ohio Senators along with ten others in the Great Lakes congressional delegation wrote to EPA Administrator Pruitt strongly opposing closing of the Region V Office. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:45 pm by EEM
Exclusion from Refugee Convention (Free Movement, Jan. 2013) [text] - Comment on Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for the Home Department; DD (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 10:08 am
From the ABA Criminal Justice Section: http://www.abanet.org/crimjust United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 8:42 am by Hutko
It should be therefore closely watched by scholars, advocates and policy makers. [read post]
9 Feb 2013, 11:34 am
Our Los Angeles marijuana lawyers, along with many others invested in medical marijuana rights, have been closely following the developments of The City of Riverside v. [read post]
7 Apr 2009, 7:45 am
Here is the abstract: This Article, a contribution to a symposium on the constitutional jurisprudence of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, focuses on the Eleventh Circuit's opinion in Adler v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 4:56 am by Timothy P. Flynn
Or the Court could render a decision going beyond the issue presented in that case and hold that the equal protection clause prohibits the state from limiting the right to marry to opposite sex couples and denying it to same sex couples.In United States v Windsor, 699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held unconstitutional the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), 1 U.S.C. sec. 7, which defines marriage as “only a legal union between one… [read post]