Search for: "In the Interest of D. M. (Dissenting Opinion)"
Results 61 - 80
of 716
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Feb 2023, 12:00 pm
§ 256b(d)(3). [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 7:45 pm
Quoting its earlier opinion in D’Lil v. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 3:33 pm
Judge Henderson dissented from the denial of the petition for the reasons she had already given in her dissent from the panel’s opinion, namely, that in her reading the F-1 statute did not authorize the rule. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:15 am
Instead we got an opinion that considered which precise interests are protected by Exemption 4. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:00 am
I'm a cat burglar. [read post]
18 Jan 2023, 11:41 am
And again, I’m looking forward to a very interesting discussion. [read post]
15 Jan 2023, 6:33 pm
Cuban stability is still (in the opinion of those who run the state) essentially a function of preventing dfoect contact with foreigners that is not carefully supervised. [read post]
19 Dec 2022, 4:00 am
They ha[d] the votes, after all. [read post]
19 Nov 2022, 12:40 pm
One might expect a dissent in an opinion of such length, but one would be mistaken in that expectation. [read post]
19 Nov 2022, 11:38 am
Justice Carroll, joined by specially assigned Judge Bent, dissents. [read post]
19 Nov 2022, 11:17 am
Specially assigned Justice Dooley dissents. [read post]
14 Nov 2022, 9:04 am
Jennings, D. [read post]
13 Nov 2022, 9:01 pm
The sole complaint of these plaintiffs—one of whom, Myra Brown, was ineligible for $20,000 in loan forgiveness under the debt relief program she challenged because her student loans are all commercially held and the other of whom, Alexander Taylor, was ineligible for $10,000 of such loan forgiveness because he hadn’t received a Pell grant—was that they’d been unable, because of the procedure by which DOE promulgated the program, to argue for more generous eligibility… [read post]
7 Nov 2022, 7:19 am
If you’d rather just see all the pieces listed chronologically, there’s a more straightforward bibliography at the bottom of the page. [read post]
10 Oct 2022, 2:42 pm
Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 17-11414 (D. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 6:20 pm
The text of the opinion follows.GUNDY v. [read post]
7 Sep 2022, 5:23 am
[Jack Goldsmith and I will have this article out in the Texas Law Review early next year, and I'm serializing it here. [read post]
1 Sep 2022, 1:01 am
I’m afraid one of my biggest criticisms of this book is rather fuzzy: that is to say, in my opinion this book lacks “background music. [read post]
30 Aug 2022, 5:01 am
" Under strict scrutiny, the government can prevail only if it shows that its restrictions on religion "are justified by a compelling interest and [are] narrowly tailored to advance that interest. [read post]
24 Aug 2022, 5:01 am
This new article of mine will be coming out next year in the Journal of Law and Religion, and I thought I'd serialize it here; there's still plenty of time for editing, so I'd love to hear people's feedback. [read post]
