Search for: "United States Supreme Court, any and all Judicial Officers thereof"
Results 61 - 80
of 301
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2022, 5:01 am
And while there are ample grounds for criticizing this approach, the fact that it has endured across presidential administrations of both political parties and in spite of legal challenges in the courts suggests that it is unlikely to go away any time soon. [read post]
3 Nov 2022, 11:00 pm
The assignment of credits in Brazil may be with or without recourse against the assignor in case of default of the debtor thereof. [read post]
2 Nov 2022, 2:17 pm
(The Supreme Court of Canada subsequently upheld Bill 5, the Better Local Government Act, 2018: see here.) [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 9:01 pm
The most recent gubernatorial appointment was made in 1987, a decade before the relevant Nebraska statute was revised and updated to provide: (1) When a vacancy occurs in the representation of the State of Nebraska in the Senate of the United States, the office shall be filled by the Governor. [read post]
27 Oct 2022, 4:00 am
Long before the “unitary” executive appears, the very plural Congress has been given the power to make all laws necessary for the “[e]xecution” of Congress’s powers and “all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. [read post]
22 Oct 2022, 8:16 am
In [the] Nixon [case], the [United States] Supreme Court stated that ‘[e]very court has supervisory power over its own records and files, and access [may be] denied where court files might[ ] become a vehicle for improper purposes. [read post]
26 Sep 2022, 5:01 am
” Supreme Court Justice Robert Grier in United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2022, 6:38 am
This crime is defined in part as “assist[ing] … any … insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or giv[ing] aid or comfort thereto. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 5:45 pm
One potential stumbling block is that the statutory provision limits its scope to an “officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States. [read post]
4 Aug 2022, 7:00 pm
The function took place the day after the United States Supreme Court announced its opinion in Dobbs v. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm
Absent past wrongdoing by certain states and subparts thereof, Congress (under the Court’s understanding of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments) would have no basis to regulate state [read post]
27 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
In the early days of the United States, the Supreme Court considered the territories to be part of the United States. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 5:58 am
”The Supreme Court has interpreted Section 101 as imposing per se limits on eligibility by excluding from protection laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas (judicial exceptions).The Court provided a two-step framework for assessing eligibility. [read post]
10 Jul 2022, 12:06 pm
The majority of the Supreme Court can content itself only with the law of the case in Dobbs, and the expectation that inferior courts will apply its holding in future cases. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 11:56 am
United States, Canales v. [read post]
15 Jun 2022, 4:49 am
EPA Court had explained that sovereign states are entitled to special solicitude under the standing doctrine. [read post]
9 Jun 2022, 11:30 am
American Axle filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court, which then invited the Solicitor General to express the views of the United States. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 10:32 am
Potential Blanket Legal Barriers Here is the text of Section 3: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or… [read post]
28 May 2022, 2:25 pm
Gonzales 7-2 ruling “Scalia’s 2005 Supreme Court decision. [read post]
20 May 2022, 1:56 pm
If, as all present Justices of the Supreme Court agree, original meaning is at least part of how courts should interpret constitutional language, then presenting evidence about the meanings of words used in a constitution at the time a constitution was adopted is appropriate. [read post]
