Search for: "Greenhouse v. Greenhouse"
Results 761 - 780
of 2,364
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Sep 2010, 1:32 pm
Specifically, Movants request the Court stay the effects of the Tailpipe Rule, Tailoring Rule, and PSD Interpretive Rule on stationary sources, such that GHG emissions are not subject to PSD and Title V pending this appeal. [read post]
13 Jul 2008, 1:56 pm
As one might expect, Linda Greenhouse's latest (and last?) [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 11:58 am
Thus, once the Supreme Court determined that the Clean Air Act reaches greenhouse gases, displacement would follow (a point I heard more than one attorney involved in the case concede before Mass. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 9:42 am
Headlines about today’s decision in Loper v Raimondo overturning the 40 year-old decision in Chevron v NRDC that granted agencies deference in their interpretation of ambiguous statutes focus on the “massive power grab,” the decision’s “sweeping” nature and call it a “blow” to the administrative state. [read post]
11 Oct 2007, 8:02 am
Medellin v. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 7:51 am
Fortunately for Obama, Massachusetts v. [read post]
17 Apr 2009, 3:05 pm
Supreme Court [Massachusetts v. [read post]
1 Apr 2007, 2:02 pm
In Massachusetts v. [read post]
27 Feb 2007, 1:10 pm
In the National Law Journal, Marcia Coyle reports here at Law.com on Hein v. [read post]
30 Oct 2014, 5:13 am
In her column for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse discusses Justice Lewis Powell’s concurring opinion in Plyer v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 10:34 am
Supreme Court ruled, in the landmark case of Massachusetts v. [read post]
2 Apr 2007, 10:57 pm
In order to find standing in Massachusetts v. [read post]
26 Sep 2007, 9:25 am
" Linda Greenhouse writes in her NY Times piece that, while Baze v. [read post]
1 Mar 2009, 6:14 am
In Matter of Laidlaw Energy and Environmental Inc. v Town of Ellicottville, the court found that the conclusion contained in the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) findings that "serious increases in harmful emissions" from the plant would result in an "unacceptable adverse impact" was not arbitrary and should be upheld. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 1:40 pm
Comer v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 5:28 am
First, the opinion, before reaching the merits, states that 4 votes (without Justice Sotomayor weighing in) remain in support of Massachusetts v. [read post]
18 Nov 2015, 9:50 pm
Occasionally a law enforcement organization or two will join one of our briefs on a particular issue, such as in Kansas v. [read post]
8 Dec 2006, 11:00 am
Tony Mauro of the Legal Times discusses the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Carey v. [read post]
20 Mar 2007, 10:48 am
Linda Greenhouse's response can be found here. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 2:46 am
” In the National Review, Roger Clegg responds to Linda Greenhouse’s question, posed in her column in The New York Times on Fisher v. [read post]
