Search for: "United States v. Charles" Results 61 - 80 of 2,205
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jul 2012, 5:09 am by Ezra Rosser
The University of Chicago Law Review has published articles from the “Understanding Education in the United States: Its Legal and Social Implications Symposium. [read post]
5 Apr 2007, 3:36 am
Ogletree, Jr., Executive Director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race & Justice at Harvard Law School, and Johanna Wald, Director of Strategic Planning at the Institute, write movingly about the United States Supreme Court's infamous 1857 decision in Dred Scott v. [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 11:36 pm by Record on Appeal
On January 24, 2012, the Hawaii Supreme Court accepted cert in Charles Mitchell Hart and Lisa Marie Hart v. [read post]
21 Oct 2018, 1:09 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
Attorney Charles Holster discusses the ramifications of the June 22, 2018 Supreme Court decision, Carpenter v. [read post]
28 May 2011, 9:21 am by Amy Burns
The petitioner in this case, Charles Andrew Fowler, killed a local police officer who had discovered him while he was preparing to rob a bank. [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 7:29 am by Margaret Lewis
The jury is still out on how the United States will perform in achieving that goal. [read post]
4 May 2009, 10:30 am
This is the court, remember, that directly and deliberately defied the United States Supreme Court in Miller-El v. [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 11:00 am by ernst
Bush to become the 43rd President of the United States, despite losing the popular vote to Al Gore.Praised by scholars and political pundits alike, the original edition of Charles Zelden’s book set a new standard for our understanding of that monumental decision. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 11:23 am by Christopher Mathews
  The state of play now is as follows: trial will begin at 1500 hours with opening statements on the missing movement offense. [read post]
14 May 2014, 4:34 am by Timothy P. Flynn
 Circuit Judge Christopher Charles Piazza's 13-page opinion in Wright v Arkansas held that the state law ban, arising from a voter-approved constitutional amendment back in 2004, was:an unconstitutional attempt to narrow the definition of equality. [read post]