Search for: "United States v. California"
Results 7581 - 7600
of 13,840
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Feb 2014, 4:56 am
as far as the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) is concerned. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 12:35 pm
There is a First Amendment issue lurking in the requirement that the policy statement “shall indicate” support of the AAP by the contractor’s “top United States executive,” Fox pointed out, explaining that this is a government requirement compelling the executive to express a certain viewpoint. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 9:57 am
See, e.g., State v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 7:51 am
See discussion in Krinsky v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 6:28 am
California and United States v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 6:28 am
Of course, for federal private-prison inmates, suits against the United States directly are out. [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 11:20 am
During employment of the retirees represented by REAOC, the County and employee bargaining units entered into several MOUs. [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 8:54 am
Indeed, in United States v. [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 5:35 am
’ ” United Slate, Local 307 v. [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 5:29 am
Also at The Volokh Conspiracy, Orin Kerr outlines “some of the possible Fourth Amendment rules that the Court might consider” in United States v. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 9:01 pm
DOMA and United States v. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 4:16 pm
United States v. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 2:54 pm
Liu v. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 7:45 am
Third, in Price v. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 6:00 am
In January 2012, the Supreme Court held in United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 12:00 pm
United States 13-457Issue: Whether the Secretary of State’s issuance of a passport based on a determination of a person’s United States citizenship is conclusive proof of the passport holder’s citizenship such that it may not be collaterally attacked. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 10:40 am
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., an Ohio federal court relied on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Clapper v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 6:19 am
In addition, [Van Praagh] claims [Gratton] has used the Van Praagh Trademark while offering her spiritual medium services at various venues throughout the United States and on her websites, Facebook Page, Twitter account and YouTube channel. . . . [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 5:43 am
Tooey v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 2:29 am
The United States Supreme Court is scheduled to issue landmark decisions early this summer regarding the constitutionality of a warrantless search of a suspect's cell phone under the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
