Search for: "U.S. v. Ballis*" Results 61 - 80 of 187
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jan 2018, 1:02 pm by William Ford
United States or permitted by the court’s decision in Munaf v. [read post]
20 Jan 2018, 5:13 am by Garrett Hinck
  On Thursday, Judge Tanya Chutkan ordered the government not to transfer the unnamed U.S. citizen being held as an enemy combatant pending a ruling on the habeas petition in Doe v. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 10:19 am by Garrett Hinck
Harry Graver summarized the briefs and oral arguments in Dalmazzi v. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 12:29 pm by Garrett Hinck
Robert Chesney and Steve Vladeck provided a primer on the merits issues in ACLU v. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 3:00 am by Garrett Hinck
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 10:20 am by Vanessa Sauter
Paul Rosenzweig defended the mosaic theory in light of Carpenter v. [read post]
29 Nov 2017, 9:06 am by Garrett Hinck
U.S. and the hearing in ACLU v. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 10:47 am by Garrett Hinck
Orin Kerr argued that Microsoft should have challenged the All Writs Act instead of the Stored Communications Act in U.S. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2017, 8:59 am by Garrett Hinck
Robert Chesney and Steve Vladeck shared the National Security Law Podcast, featuring their discussion of the Mueller indictments, ACLU v. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 10:20 am by Garrett Hinck
Kahn posted the government’s reply brief in ACLU v. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 6:49 am by Yishai Schwartz
Moreover, Footnote 3 of the JCPOA’s Annex V explicitly warns that “[t]he provisions of this [Security Council] Resolution do not constitute provisions of this JCPOA. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 6:49 am by Yishai Schwartz
Moreover, Footnote 3 of the JCPOA’s Annex V explicitly warns that “[t]he provisions of this [Security Council] Resolution do not constitute provisions of this JCPOA. [read post]