Search for: "United States v. King" Results 701 - 720 of 2,955
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 May 2019, 3:13 am
In either case, a declarant is subject to United States perjury laws if willful or knowing false statements are made.When the declaration is signed in the United States, the laws of the United States apply automatically. [read post]
25 Apr 2019, 3:57 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks whether, to convict defendant in U.S. illegally for violating a federal gun-possession law, prosecutors must show that defendant knew he was in the country illegally. [read post]
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that “sexual orientation discrimination is motivated, at least in part, by sex and is thus a subset of sex discrimination. [read post]
21 Apr 2019, 9:01 pm by Joseph Margulies
Over the course of a long career as a civil rights and criminal defense lawyer, I have spent a great deal of time in a great many state, federal, and military prisons in the United States and her colonial outposts in Guantanamo and Iraq. [read post]
5 Apr 2019, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
And, in other news from the FJC, check out the most recent addition to the Center's unit to our Famous Federal Trials series, U.S. v. [read post]
Indeed, the US Supreme Court explained in Burger King Corp v Rudzewicz that “even a single act can support jurisdiction” so long as it “creates a substantial connection with the forum. [read post]
31 Mar 2019, 11:50 pm by INFORRM
United States A federal judge in Virginia has ruled that a defamation claim against Inforwars host Alex Jones can proceed against him and other defendants over the Charlottesville rallies that led to the death of protester Heather Heyer. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 12:51 pm by Scott Bomboy
In June 2015, a divided Supreme Court said in King v. [read post]
23 Mar 2019, 7:53 pm by Timothy P. Flynn
Last month, the SCOTUS ruled in Timbs v Indiana that a state's fine or forfeiture scheme may be excessive and thus unconstitutional under the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution. [read post]
  Moreover, in Burke v United Kingdom (App No.19807/0) 11 July 2006, the argument that there was insufficient protection of art 2 rights because a doctor might decide to withdraw CANH without being under an obligation to obtain the approval of the court was expressly rejected. [read post]