Search for: "People v Bui"
Results 821 - 840
of 5,168
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Nov 2020, 6:00 pm
Because a purchase mandate to buy insurance simply required people to part with some amount of money. [read post]
24 Nov 2020, 6:54 am
Google Epic Games, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Nov 2020, 2:55 am
In October 2019, three people were charged in connection with smuggling cigarettes on the Staten Island Ferry. [read post]
22 Nov 2020, 4:01 am
G, 2020 SCC 38 (38585) appeal from 2019 ONCA 264 “Christopher’s Law” draws discriminatory distinctions between people found guilty and people found NCRMD of sexual offences on the [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 11:23 am
Dunkins (EFF) New Federal Court Rulings Find Geofence Warrants Unconstitutional (EFF) EFF Files Amicus Brief Arguing Geofence Warrants Violate the Fourth Amendment (Ongoing case of People v Dawes in SF Superior Court re geofence warrants) People v. [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 4:32 am
The oral argument transcript in California v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 4:25 pm
However, it isn’t widespread and requires buy-in from both content publishers and distributors. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 1:38 pm
Miller (Wikipedia) U.S. v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 1:25 pm
Xavier Becerra and United States of America v. [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 2:54 pm
Although there may be five votes to strike down the ACA’s individual mandate – the provision in the law that directs virtually all Americans to buy health insurance – a majority of the court in California v. [read post]
9 Nov 2020, 2:13 pm
” Today, people in relationships often have very different credit histories. [read post]
Symposium: “Schrödinger’s tax” is dead – and the command to buy health insurance is unconstitutional
9 Nov 2020, 6:28 am
He concluded, “The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 5:23 am
” Zito v. [read post]
6 Nov 2020, 12:18 pm
There's simply no reason at all to think that the 2017 Congress believed that anyone (no reasonable person, anyway) would purchase unwanted insurance because of a "sense of legal obligation" engendered by the 2017 statutory amendment.But even if there were some such unreasonable people out there (such as, perhaps, the individual plaintiffs in the case) who mistakenly read the amended Section 5000A to require them to purchase insurance, those… [read post]
6 Nov 2020, 7:26 am
In California v. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 2:09 pm
Colachino v. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 1:17 pm
You know, buy insurance or else. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 10:34 am
In a case called PDS Consultants, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 7:35 am
’s V 2.65% $5.3 billion deal to acquire Plaid Inc., a key player in the financial-technology space. [read post]
4 Nov 2020, 1:27 pm
” In NFIB v. [read post]
