Search for: "Strong v. State"
Results 8121 - 8140
of 16,216
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2012, 4:53 am
Citing United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 2:04 pm
Yet I can’t see any reason why, for example, one would believe judges would be especially good at figuring out the right balance between the acknowledged state interest in preserving human life and the “fundamental right” to terminate pregnancy, as the Supreme Court has been doing since Roe v. [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 6:03 pm
Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 7:15 am
In LaVoice v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 2:32 pm
The disparity was strong enough, the judge said, “as to support an inference of intentional discrimination. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 3:01 pm
United States and United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 4:22 pm
While the judge speculated about some reasons that California voters might have, he seemed uncertain that those were strong enough. [read post]
23 May 2019, 6:34 am
However, in South Dakota v. [read post]
11 May 2010, 1:52 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
9 Apr 2007, 3:37 am
Maryland and Worcester v. [read post]
6 Jan 2012, 5:47 am
Thus the Case of the Week is Jordan v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 10:23 am
" The case is called Larson v. [read post]
20 Sep 2010, 10:11 am
The case of DirectTV, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 9:55 am
Then, last Friday, in Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 3:49 am
., State Trooper Helmes Jaime said. [read post]
28 Dec 2022, 3:50 am
Periods of loosening include the 1990s when the approach to standing was increasingly liberalized, exemplified by R. v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex p. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 2:00 am
Justice Harris followed Machado v. [read post]
1 Dec 2007, 7:35 am
See Phillips v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 6:14 am
The cases include Association for Molecular Pathology v. [read post]
18 Oct 2013, 11:32 am
Second—and in what is, to my knowledge, a first—Judge McLaughlin’s memorandum confronts what has been (for some) a long-lingering Elephant in the Constitutional Room: the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in United States v. [read post]
