Search for: "Long v. United States"
Results 761 - 780
of 20,453
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jun 2017, 8:21 pm
Murr v. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 4:42 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 6:21 am
The test focused on: Whether the wrongful conduct occurred in the United States; and Whether the wrongful conduct had a substantial effect in the United States or upon United States citizens. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:26 pm
For that purpose we consider the legal position of the subsidiary units of government in the United States and their relationship to federal power. [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 2:29 pm
United States and Beckles v. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
United States clarified that the primary federal law regulating state and local corruption, 18 USC § 666, does not bar state and local officials from accepting “gratuities”—gifts provided without a quid pro quo. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
United States clarified that the primary federal law regulating state and local corruption, 18 USC § 666, does not bar state and local officials from accepting “gratuities”—gifts provided without a quid pro quo. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
United States clarified that the primary federal law regulating state and local corruption, 18 USC § 666, does not bar state and local officials from accepting “gratuities”—gifts provided without a quid pro quo. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
United States clarified that the primary federal law regulating state and local corruption, 18 USC § 666, does not bar state and local officials from accepting “gratuities”—gifts provided without a quid pro quo. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
United States clarified that the primary federal law regulating state and local corruption, 18 USC § 666, does not bar state and local officials from accepting “gratuities”—gifts provided without a quid pro quo. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 10:00 pm
United States clarified that the primary federal law regulating state and local corruption, 18 USC § 666, does not bar state and local officials from accepting “gratuities”—gifts provided without a quid pro quo. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 3:30 am
Sheila Vélez Martinez Despite our long historical presence, there is a general sociolegal invisibility of Latina/os in the United States. [read post]
28 Oct 2022, 5:55 am
In Moore v. [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 9:40 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 12:21 pm
”) State v. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 7:28 pm
The recent United States Supreme Court ruling in Padilla v. [read post]
9 Jul 2007, 1:54 am
You remember the Branch Consultants v. [read post]
9 Jan 2008, 4:32 am
United States v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 9:00 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 3:27 pm
CNN's Bill Mears reports that the case could affect state laws in the twenty-two states that have laws similar to the federal restrictions overruled today. [read post]