Search for: "United States v. Close"
Results 9361 - 9380
of 14,201
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jan 2024, 2:51 pm
Most recently, in United Talent Agency, LLC v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 11:00 am
To this end, the defendants, assisted by others in the United States and Pakistan, conspired to provide and provided material support to the Pakistani Taliban by soliciting, collecting and transferring money from the United States to supporters of the Pakistani Taliban, primarily using bank accounts and wire transfer services in the United States and Pakistan. [read post]
1 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm
ENDNOTES [1] United States of America v. [read post]
31 May 2024, 11:58 am
In an unusual move, the United States filed a brief supporting further review. [read post]
4 Jan 2019, 2:11 pm
And “no matter how the broader issue of” whether courts should generally review partisan-gerrymandering claims is resolved, they contended, this is such an easy case that the 2016 plan cannot stand: North Carolina Republicans had an “official state policy to maximize” their party’s representation in Congress, and under the plan Republicans in 2016 won 10 out of the state’s 13 congressional seats “even though the statewide vote was nearly… [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 10:36 pm
You can read a more complete description of the requirements for class certification in our article on the class action antitrust case of Comcast v. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 7:26 am
Under United States Supreme Court Case, Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc., v. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 10:46 am
Under United States Supreme Court Case, Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc., v. [read post]
26 Sep 2016, 4:43 am
In The Intercept, Lee Fang takes issue with Justice Anthony Kennedy’s recent refusal to respond to Fang’s request for a comment on Kennedy’s majority opinion in Citizens United v. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 12:57 pm
Not as closely on point, but from an appellate court is, Pearson v. [read post]
14 Dec 2014, 9:52 am
The Supreme Court of the United States has since clarified this position in Riley v. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 7:46 pm
The voting was as follows: In favour: Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, China, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Morocco, Namibia, Pakistan, Philippines, Russian Federation, South Africa, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam Against: Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Montenegro, Republic of Korea, Romania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and… [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 12:38 am
Dev v. [read post]
8 May 2023, 9:01 pm
In United States v. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 10:34 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 8:52 am
Looking to Strasbourg jurisprudence, he commented, “[t]he ECtHR will only find that the state has acted in violation of A1P1” if its judgment is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” (James v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 123). [read post]
9 May 2010, 9:14 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 8:49 am
But recognizing that the U.S. needed tools to quickly address emerging national security threats that fall short of war, Congress in parallel enacted IEEPA to give the president broad powers to respond to “any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States. [read post]
24 Jan 2014, 12:57 am
In FDIC v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 8:23 am
§ 1010.306(c). [6] The definition of “United States person” contained in the FBAR instructions as revised in October 2008 included “a person in and doing business in the United States” in an attempt to conform more closely to the statutory language of the BSA. [read post]
