Search for: "Powers v. Powers"
Results 741 - 760
of 55,682
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jan 2009, 11:05 am
Inc. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2023, 7:12 am
Accor tells a powerful story. [read post]
9 Oct 2012, 9:16 pm
McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. [read post]
7 Feb 2020, 6:22 am
When the scope of the interstate commerce authority expanded during World War II, with the Supreme Court’s 1942 Wickard v. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 4:33 pm
" Overall, S.E.C. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2017, 1:17 pm
Moreover, the causes of action under the ATS, the Supreme Court’s 2004 language in Sosa v. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 9:32 pm
Supreme Court in Hughes v. [read post]
20 Dec 2006, 4:33 pm
Under 91(27) the federal government has the plenary (total) power to make criminal laws for Canada. [read post]
12 Oct 2018, 6:38 am
Unilateral presidential withdrawal is better understood to be either incompatible with the implied will of Congress or, at best, an exercise of presidential power where Congress has not spoken on the issue. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 3:12 pm
USA v. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 12:09 am
Lopez v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 12:39 pm
(Kansas City v. [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 7:10 am
In Bold Alliance et al. v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 11:55 am
In both cases we must ask whether the President's action is authorized by Congress (in which case the President's power is at its height), whether it is in defiance of Congress (in which case the President's power is at its "lowest ebb"), or whether it exists in a "twilight zone" where Congress has not clearly spoken (These categories are drawn from Justice Jackson's famous concurrence in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2008, 9:49 am
See Medellin v. [read post]
15 Feb 2023, 4:05 pm
Here is the abstract: National Federation of Independent Businesses v. [read post]
20 May 2009, 5:59 pm
The Supreme Court on Monday granted cert. in Free Enterprise Fund v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 2:38 am
Regina v B (F); Same v P (A); Same v C (J) [2010] EWCA Crim 1857; [2010] WLR (D) 21 “A judge sitting in the Crown Court had no power to quash an indictment simply because he did not believe that the proceedings were appropriately brought or were not in the public interest when compared with his assessment of the needs of other cases and that had not changed as a result of the introduction of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2010. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 7:30 am
In Metzgar v. [read post]
21 May 2019, 7:15 am
Yesterday’s opinion in Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. [read post]
