Search for: "United States v. California" Results 7201 - 7220 of 13,840
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jun 2021, 2:38 pm by Molly Lockwood
Browning, Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in 1988–1989. [read post]
14 Oct 2022, 7:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
By contrast, proponents of animal rights object to all or almost all animal agriculture on the ground that it is inherently unjust, varying only in degree of cruelty.The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)--which supported California in defending Prop 12--is an example of an animal welfare organization. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 11:58 am by Kenneth J. Vanko
--Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaOpinion Date: 11/9/10Cite: Accenture, LLP v. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 10:32 am by Rebecca Tushnet
HHN moved to dismiss and moved to strike the state law trade libel claim under California’s anti-SLAPP law. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 3:15 am by Barry Sookman
9th Circuit Finds No Infringement in Steinbeck Family Feud https://t.co/IGk8NsUayr 2017-11-19 Everyone has been hacked, say police | News | The Times & The Sunday Times https://t.co/LUKYEqUp29 2017-11-19 United States: A Collection of Articles Commemorating Zeran v. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 1:40 pm
  While Buffalo Bill from "Silence of the Lambs" may not be who most would think about when reading Franz v. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 7:26 am by Conor McEvily
” Finally, Joan Biskupic of the USA Today previews next week’s argument in United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2020, 10:22 am by Peter Margulies
District Court for the Northern District of California, which barred DHS from enforcing the rule in four states bordering Mexico: California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. [read post]
22 May 2019, 4:10 am by Edith Roberts
” At The George Washington Law Review’s On the Docket blog, Alan Morrison weighs in last week’s decision in Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 7:41 am by Peter Margulies
As Simon observed (and the insightful and exhaustively researched amicus brief by California and other states attests), the ACA repeatedly mentions the eligibility for subsidized insurance of foreign nationals (noncitizens) who are lawfully present in the United States—the very population that the uninsured ban targets. [read post]