Search for: "State v. Race"
Results 8021 - 8040
of 8,740
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Apr 2023, 10:51 am
Hoeflich and Stephen Sheppard, Lucy and the Judge: Wood v. [read post]
2 Jul 2023, 1:13 pm
Its roots are in the Supreme Court's 1943 decision in West Virginia v. [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 5:47 pm
United States, decided on October 18. [read post]
9 May 2022, 6:32 am
By Gretchen Sisson When a draft of the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 4:10 am
The measure provides law school loan forgiveness for state and local prosecutors and state, local and federal public defenders who agree to serve for a minimum of three years. [read post]
4 May 2010, 12:59 am
The first rule of tax club Filed under: Bully State,WTF? [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 12:09 pm
Co. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 5:47 pm
United States, decided on October 18. [read post]
25 May 2015, 4:15 am
Burrage v. [read post]
6 Jan 2023, 6:56 am
In a state that requires no permit? [read post]
10 Nov 2021, 7:45 am
Its importance was further highlighted by the abortive case of New Hampshire v. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 8:15 am
For the purpose of using the rule against a particular judge in a blanket fashion by a prosecuting agency, defender group or law firm (State v. [read post]
22 Aug 2023, 6:06 am
If a red state secretary of state fails to decline Trump’s eligibility, that too will be challenged in court. [read post]
26 Oct 2017, 7:38 am
The new school of political economy that he created at the University of Virginia was “meant to train a new generation of thinkers to push back against Brown [v. [read post]
31 Mar 2025, 5:01 am
One state court held (by a 5–4 vote) that those statutes themselves violate the First Amendment when applied to newspaper reporters or editors.[7] But in AP v. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 5:49 am
Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Gonzalez v. [read post]
4 Aug 2015, 7:24 am
In Pugsley v. [read post]
4 Mar 2025, 9:10 am
[1] Thomson-Reuters Enterprise Centre GMBH v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 1:37 pm
In Coalition for TJ v. [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 9:23 am
One thing which also may be guaranteed is that there will be unintended effects – as socio-legal scholars describe it, there will be a gap between the intended effects of the formal law and everyday life.In R(CPAG) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2011] EWHC 2616 (Admin), CPAG challenged two of the new rules – relating to the maximum weekly caps, and the reduction of the maximum size in accommodation eligible for hb (from five to four bedrooms) –… [read post]
