Search for: "MILLER v. UNITED STATES"
Results 721 - 740
of 2,698
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2018, 8:21 am
United States. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 10:17 am
By the Kean Miller State and Local Tax Team On June 21, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in South Dakota v. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 9:33 am
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued perhaps the most significant and far-reaching decision affecting state sales and use tax collection since its Quill v. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 9:01 pm
Simmons, and they cannot be subjected to life in prison, Miller v. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 12:47 pm
Austin Miller hopes to be the next commander of Resolute Support, the United States’ mission in Afghanistan, and of NATO allied forces in the area, according to Military Times. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 6:56 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 5:27 pm
, 296 F.3d 376, 378 (5th Cir. 2002)(quoting Miller v. [read post]
14 Jun 2018, 9:01 pm
At the time of his alleged violation of the state’s civil rights statute, Colorado did not recognize same-sex marriages as a matter of state law, and the United States Supreme Court had said nothing to suggest that limiting marriage to a man and a woman was unconstitutional. [read post]
14 Jun 2018, 5:34 am
That brings us to the new NC case, State v. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 6:38 am
By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
7 Jun 2018, 12:16 pm
The early dismissal would be final as to that claim, see United States v. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 4:11 am
” In an op-ed for The Hill, Mark Miller takes a similar view, maintaining that “this case is less about Gundy than it is about the Supreme Court reining in the regulatory state run amok, and requiring Congress to get back to doing its job. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 6:31 am
”) United States v. [read post]
31 May 2018, 9:01 pm
As I explain in more detail below as I parse the complaint in the United States v. [read post]
31 May 2018, 11:18 am
Its first section read, “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. [read post]
28 May 2018, 9:56 am
Cir. 2013) and, thanks to a hung jury in the first trial, in United States v. [read post]
24 May 2018, 9:01 pm
United States(1955). [read post]
23 May 2018, 6:34 pm
The United States Supreme Court held in California v. [read post]
21 May 2018, 3:47 pm
This Act was challenged in 1939 in United States v. [read post]
20 May 2018, 1:23 pm
United States v. [read post]
