Search for: "In re Kidd"
Results 61 - 80
of 98
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Sep 2011, 10:34 pm
Levy Fellow alum Jeremy Kidd is also on the law school market this year. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 12:34 pm
For example: “Did you read what Judge O’Scannlain wrote in al-Kidd v. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 4:23 am
Jeremy Kidd, David C. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 4:25 pm
Kidd wants to know if this can be treated as a first aid case and handled in-house. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 3:34 pm
You can’t expect a championship to fall in your lap, even when you’re up 2-1. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 4:24 am
At issue in Ashcroft v. al-Kidd was the Justice Department’s use of the Federal “material witness” statute in the wake of 9/11 to take individuals suspected of terrorism ties into custody, then hold them without any intent to later call them as a witness. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 2:57 pm
We're celebrating with a weekly blog series featuring diverse voices from the LGBT community. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:33 pm
(Supreme Court Justices . . . they’re just like us!) [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 6:03 am
Al-Kidd. - http://goo.gl/mtJqYAnother Courtney Love Twitter Fail? [read post]
31 May 2011, 3:19 pm
Either way this series goes, we're good. [read post]
26 May 2011, 9:57 am
Specifically, he alleges that Po, the portly panda voiced by Jack Black, is a virtual double for Kidd, a giant panda that Gordon first drew in the early 1990s. [read post]
24 May 2011, 3:42 pm
And they’re joined in those efforts by the vast majority of the GOP caucus. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 9:00 am
So, you're thinking that piracy is the product of failed states? [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 12:53 pm
Lee Gelernt, Al-Kidd's lawyer, said "only a few hundred each year. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 3:30 pm
[…] What we're talking about here is a statute that has enormous consequences […] and to say that there is going to be absolute immunity is very dangerous. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 6:54 am
New Mexico and Ashcroft v. al-Kidd. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 11:29 pm
Al-Kidd. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 3:28 pm
You're arresting them, in effect. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 11:07 am
They’re simply arguing that it’s perfectly lawful for Ashcroft to have done that and in any event he should have immunity. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 10:42 pm
It's one thing to argue that certain seizures are consistent with the Fourth Amendment regardless of whether they're authorized by statute, but that's in the short term (as in Moore). [read post]
