Search for: "In re: Biven"
Results 61 - 80
of 167
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jan 2018, 3:39 am
The subjects of searches can file civil actions under Bivens or Section 1983. [read post]
10 Dec 2017, 7:33 am
LEXIS 201243 (WD MI, Dec. 7, 2017), a Michigan federal district court held that a Bivens action is not available for a free exercise claim.In Dawson v. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 4:47 am
Last Friday, the Solicitor General filed a self-described “Petition for a Writ of Certiorari” in No. 17-654, Hargan v. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 12:28 pm
Dimaya were set for re-argument next term. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 11:29 am
Abbasi, which declined to extend Bivens claims to “new” contexts. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 11:52 am
” (We’re basically back in “every term a blockbuster” mode. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 4:25 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Richard Re observes that “critics of Abbasi have argued that Bivens is now ‘all but overruled’ and ‘all-but limited … to its facts. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 3:13 pm
[Volokh Conspiracy / Washington Post] * Professor Richard Re argues that Bivens isn't dead -- at least not yet. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 12:59 pm
Bivens v. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 9:02 am
” Bivens, 403 U. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 12:04 pm
"If you're cold, put on a sweater, perhaps an overcoat, perhaps also turn up the heat, but do not set fire to the house. [read post]
17 May 2017, 1:45 pm
” It therefore seems clear that the Justices themselves have decided to re-enter the Bivens fray—although it remains to be seen (and we may soon discover) whether their goal is to reinvigorate the doctrine or inter it once and for all. [read post]
17 May 2017, 7:48 am
” It therefore seems clear that the Justices themselves have decided to re-enter the Bivens fray—although it remains to be seen (and we may soon discover) whether their goal is to reinvigorate the doctrine or inter it once and for all. [read post]
15 Apr 2017, 3:55 am
Unbeknownst to many, if you’re a federal agency, you have regulations. [read post]
22 Jan 2017, 8:42 am
Abassi, the follow-up to Iqbal raising three issues: 1) Whether a Bivens action can be brought against policymakers on national-security matters; 2) whether the complaints were sufficient under Twiqbal; and 3) whether any of this was clearly established in 2001. 1) This case might give the Court an opportunity to re-emphasize and re-ignite "obvious alternative explanation" as part of the pleading analysis. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 2:06 pm
Gershengorn assured her that lack of access to an attorney was a short-lived situation, and that wardens had re-established visits from attorneys by September 20, 2001. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 10:59 am
United States, and In re Ross. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 10:46 am
Under our decisions, the district court had more than ample cause to turn down Klayman’s application: he is involved in an ethics proceeding before the District of Columbia Bar, and he was not candid with the court about the status of those proceedings; he disclosed that he was twice barred in perpetuity from appearing pro hac vice before judges in the Central District of California and the Southern District of New York, but he failed to list numerous cases—all available on Westlaw or… [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 4:09 am
” Also for Constitution Daily, Lyle Denniston reports that two of the three cases the court added to its docket this week involve the “Bivens remedy,” named for a 1971 case in which the court allowed a lawsuit against federal agents based on a constitutional violation; he observes that the “two cases have the potential for a major new statement by the court, perhaps an attempt to put the Bivens remedy so far out of reach that it would become, in essence… [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 12:14 pm
Himmelreich, re-posted from SCOTUSblog, with permission: If you read the briefs in Simmons v. [read post]
