Search for: "United States v. Peoples" Results 8181 - 8200 of 22,872
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Aug 2012, 11:17 pm by zshapiro
His lawyers filed a request to stay the execution today with the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 3:00 am by John Day
 In so holding, the court cited several United States Supreme Court decisions that discuss qualified immunity for government employees, such as police officers. [read post]
4 Nov 2022, 2:47 pm by Kalvis Golde
Everton Daye received a visa to move from Jamaica to the United States in 2008. [read post]
24 Sep 2007, 1:23 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKCriminal PracticeDeportee Denied Expedited Relief to Revive Coram Nobis Claim to Withdraw Guilty Plea United States v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 11:49 am by Ilya Somin
" The ruling had a big impact on debates over takings law (both in the United States and around the world), and generated a massive political reaction. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 4:43 am by Curtis Bradley, Jack Goldsmith
First, it states the “sense of Congress” that the president “shall not withdraw the United States from NATO,” and that “the case Goldwater v. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 10:21 am by Luke Rioux
The panel held that the state court’s failure to comply with Brady v. [read post]
30 May 2018, 4:04 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks whether the government must obtain a warrant for cell-site-location information. [read post]
13 May 2011, 11:59 am by JB
What Congress may not do under the Commerce Clause is explained in United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 1:24 pm by Justin Silverman
United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) (refusing to stop the publication of classified documents about U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War);  Florida Star v. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 1:24 pm by Justin Silverman
United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) (refusing to stop the publication of classified documents about U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War);  Florida Star v. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 8:00 am by Sasha Volokh
The state courts interpreted this as an exclusion of LGBT people, but the Court recognized that this was an attempt to alter the parade organizers' message. [read post]