Search for: "State v. Congress"
Results 8801 - 8820
of 29,297
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Nov 2016, 6:52 pm
However, the district court looked to the Supreme Court’s 1985 holding in Garcia v. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 4:30 am
In Grutter v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 8:30 am
In the face of deeply entrenched patterns of residential segregation and exclusion, Congress enacted the FHA in 1968 to effectuate “the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing throughout the United States. [read post]
27 May 2016, 2:14 pm
Coyne v. [read post]
15 Sep 2020, 11:31 am
., to oversee the disposition of any disputed state election results…. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 2:42 pm
Ed. 579 (1819), to United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2020, 4:03 am
Hamdi v. [read post]
20 Nov 2007, 5:25 am
In District of Columbia v. [read post]
4 May 2016, 12:46 pm
He stated that “[if the Congress was] trying to build a little court proceeding [within PTAB,] . . . [read post]
23 Jan 2021, 4:02 pm
Consortum, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 4:30 am
Dicuio v. [read post]
2 Apr 2007, 10:57 pm
The case pit a dozen states and a dozen environmental organizations against the Bush Administration, ten other states, and many polluters. [read post]
13 May 2015, 5:12 am
” United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm
As the Supreme Court explained in Mistretta v. [read post]
10 May 2016, 2:05 pm
Related Cases: Jewel v. [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 6:47 am
An editorial in the New York Times calls on Congress to pass legislation overturning last Term's decision in Ashcroft v. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 9:12 am
United States, 156 U. [read post]
22 Jan 2021, 6:50 am
How sloppy can the state mandate be before its speech-suppression consequences are so clear that courts should step in and, like the court in CDT v. [read post]
22 Jan 2021, 6:49 am
How sloppy can the state mandate be before its speech-suppression consequences are so clear that courts should step in and, like the court in CDT v. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 4:31 am
The first is United States v. [read post]
