Search for: "US v. Michael Majors"
Results 61 - 80
of 3,377
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2024, 3:37 am
And don’t get me started on the Reasonably Scared Cop Rule of Graham v. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 12:33 am
The investigation will concern the impartiality requirements for programs dealing with matters of major political controversy and major matters relating to current public policy. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 12:08 pm
Let us be clear. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 6:16 am
New York and 335-7 LLC v. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 11:47 am
In Morgan v. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 10:23 am
” Cariou v. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 9:05 pm
The SEC also provided guidance on the use of projections generally in SEC filings and specifically in de-SPAC transactions. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 1:23 pm
Another major concern is director independence. [read post]
14 Feb 2024, 3:05 pm
v. [read post]
14 Feb 2024, 12:26 pm
From Kruse v. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
During last week’s Supreme Court oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 3:44 pm
Also of note, the majority (77.1%) of these federal illegal reentry defendants did have to deal with the impact of a prior criminal history in sentencing under the USSG Sentencing Tables. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 10:01 am
For some of us, the argument brought back vivid memories of covering Bush v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 9:36 am
Lash's response to the Amar brothers' amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
On January 29, 2024, Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu spoke at the University of Michigan Stephen M. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 7:45 pm
And tomorrow, Thursday, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:35 pm
at 827, and (ii) that a state may not use exclusion from its ballot for the “avowed purpose,” id, at 831, or the “sole purpose,” id. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:02 pm
at 827, and (ii) that a state may not use exclusion from its ballot for the “avowed purpose,” id, at 831, or the “sole purpose,” id. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 7:20 am
This highlights one major concern about the use of constitutional legislative history: its capacity, if not done faithfully and carefully, to mislead and distort. [read post]