Search for: "JOHN DOE" Results 9181 - 9200 of 40,533
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 May 2013, 8:06 am by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 9:13 am by Amy Howe
The opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts was a broad ruling, making clear that when state and local governments choose to subsidize private schools, they must allow families to use taxpayer funds to pay for religious schools. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 11:31 am by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. [read post]
21 Oct 2018, 4:59 am by SHG
After Chief Justice John Roberts reiterated his opposition to cameras at the Supreme Court, Kansas Court of Appeals Judge Steve Leben took issue on the twitters. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 1:26 pm by Jessica Engler
On June 8, 2023, the Louisiana legislature enrolled for Governor John Bel Edwards a bill intended to extent parental consent requirements on social media use by children under the age of 16. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 1:27 pm by Michael O'Hear
  Clarke may have been responding, at least in part, to Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm’s Feb. 11 address at Marquette Law School. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 7:17 am by Eugene Volokh
(Here is the latest edition of the Institute for Justice’s weekly Short Circuit newsletter, written by John Ross.) [read post]
29 May 2013, 11:36 am by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Tuesday’s relisted cases. [read post]
1 May 2007, 2:28 pm
John Boehner (R-OH), sued McDermott because McDermott gave to reporters a tape of Newt Gingrich violating his agreement with the House Ethics Committee. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 4:26 am by SHG
So does a president get away with it? [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 1:01 am by Andrew Dickinson
That does not, it must be emphasised, require a raft of new measures, or consistent tinkering with the old ones. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 5:00 am by Kevin
Q: How many pages would it take the Ninth Circuit to explain why attacking someone with bare hands does not qualify as "assault with a dangerous weapon"? [read post]