Search for: "Baker v. Tennessee" Results 61 - 80 of 143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Jun 2019, 4:07 am by Edith Roberts
Blake Gray writes that “[w]ine lovers anxiously awaiting a US Supreme Court decision that could change liquor laws nationwide will have to wait another few days” for the ruling in Tennessee Wine & Spirits Retailers Association v. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:31 pm by Rick Hasen
Election Administration to Avoid Electoral Meltdown, 62 Washington & Lee Law Review 937 (2005) Rethinking the Unconstitutionality of Contribution and Expenditure Limits in Ballot Measure Campaigns, 78 Southern California Law Review 885 (2005) Congressional Power to Renew the Preclearance Provisions of the Voting Rights Act after Tennessee v. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 12:39 pm by Lyle Denniston
From the point of view of the four states involved in the cases, their lawyers apparently will not be prevented from making arguments on two points to try to help them salvage their bans: first, the Supreme Court settled that issue in a summary ruling in 1972 in the case of Baker v. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 1:07 pm by Bexis
  That turned up cases applying the same rationale under federal law:  Baker v. [read post]
1 Sep 2007, 8:09 am
This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing claims challenging Tennessee's driver license law as violative of certain aliens' right to equal protection and right to travel. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 1:16 pm by Dale Carpenter
Under this approach, the Sixth Circuit would consider itself bound by the one-sentence order in 1972’s Baker v. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 4:05 am by Edith Roberts
” At The George Washington Law Review’s On the Docket blog, Alan Morrison looks at Tennessee Wine & Spirits Retailers Association v. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 11:36 am by Katherine Pompilio
Kurup posted the unanimous court decision in FBI v. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 7:44 pm
After dutifully arguing for four pages that he was bound by the ancient one-line decision from the Supreme Court in Baker v. [read post]