Search for: "The PEOPLE v. Watkins"
Results 61 - 80
of 189
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2018, 6:00 am
The government has sought to resolve this tension in this fashion: People who are subject to an entry ban should not be issued a visa, for such an act would be futile. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 1:08 pm
” [Citations]; see also People v. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 3:00 am
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
2 Jan 2018, 9:07 am
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
18 Dec 2017, 3:00 am
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 3:00 am
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 9:50 am
ICYMI: Yesterday on Lawfare Robert Chesney argued that the government's arguments in ACLU v. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 12:16 am
Watkins (1874) and Cow v. [read post]
18 Nov 2017, 7:46 am
Weinberger also noted that the U.S. investigation has led back to some of the people involved in the Moscow related attacks. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 5:20 pm
” Watkins v. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 5:20 pm
” Watkins v. [read post]
10 Oct 2017, 7:36 am
Watkins, ___ N.C. [read post]
6 Oct 2017, 11:24 am
Supreme Court's ruling in Hurst v. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 3:27 pm
In Girouard v. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 7:45 am
State v. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 11:49 am
” Miranda v. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 9:05 pm
[Baylen Linnekin, earlier] “Justice Department Disability Demands Raise Serious Free Speech Issues” [Hans Bader, CEI, earlier on the Berkeley online course takedown] Government shouldn’t be entitled to shut down recording of its officers in public places when it doesn’t interfere with law enforcement [Ilya Shapiro and Devin Watkins on Cato Institute brief in 9th Circuit case of Jacobson v. [read post]
19 Mar 2017, 9:05 pm
[Packingham v. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 10:05 am
Read the May 2016 Order in State v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 4:27 am
” At the Cato Institute’s Cato at Liberty blog, Ilya Shapiro and Devin Watkins discuss Buehler v. [read post]