Search for: "Short v. Downs" Results 801 - 820 of 8,346
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Nov 2022, 10:23 am by David Kopel
Part V addresses Miller and Tucker's claim that the American Founders were unfamiliar with dramatic technological changes in firearms — a claim that is refuted by Dupuy's data. [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 1:20 pm by Giles Peaker
The Court held that again, this was either ‘to substantially the same effect’ or saved by a sensible, purposive approach, as per Northwood v Fearn. v) Was provision of the information in 2010 suffice to be protection for the August 2015 tenancy? [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 10:01 am by jonathanturley
McKamey insists that it is just a “crazy haunted house” and stops well short of the legal-definition of torture. [read post]
27 Oct 2022, 5:30 am by Josh Blackman
Short of having a sit-down with a Justice, or reviewing their papers, we are stuck with the written opinion. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:58 am by INFORRM
The case is 303 Creative LLC v Elenis, on appeal from No. 19-1413 (10th Cir. 2021) (also noted on this point here); certiorari was granted on 22 February 2022 (pdf); it has now been set down for argument on Monday, 5 December 2022 (pdf); and updates can be monitored via SCOTUSblog. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For a constitutional theory to be (minimally) acceptable, it must preserve the result in Brown v. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 5:40 am by Florian Mueller
" Tellingly, Google itself cited foreign decision in its submission, and the CCI specifically names last year's Epic Games v. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 8:58 am by Jonathan Bailey
Rightsholders are disappointed by the announcement, saying that nothing short of legislative action has the potential to help. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 5:14 am by INFORRM
Canada The Superior Court of Justice, Ontario handed down judgement in Marcellin v LPS et all 2022 ONSC 5886. [read post]
13 Oct 2022, 6:05 am by Joseph Margulies
Habib, who is Australian, had been one of the four petitioners in Rasul v. [read post]