Search for: "Bagley v. State" Results 81 - 100 of 196
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jun 2015, 7:31 am by Amy Howe
At The Incidental Economist, Nicholas Bagley discusses the possibility that the Court “tipped its hand” in King v. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 4:04 am by Amy Howe
” In The Incidental Economist, Nicholas Bagley considers whether, if the Court rules for the plaintiffs in King v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 3:30 am by Amy Howe
  Briefly: At The Incidental Economist, Nicholas Bagley discusses the Court’s recent opinion in Armstrong v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 4:23 am by Amy Howe
Caulkett and Bank of America v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 12:22 pm by Old Fox
Earlier this month, the Utah Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Bagley v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 7:18 am by Amy Howe
Wednesday’s oral arguments in King v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 7:56 am by Marty Lederman
"  The canon in question was applied by the Chief Justice, on behalf of six Justices, in last year's Bond decision--namely, the “the well-established principle” of Gregory v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 3:36 am by Amy Howe
Yesterday the Court heard oral arguments in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 4:13 am by Amy Howe
Next week’s oral arguments in King v. [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 4:30 am by Kevin
That wouldn't be unusual except that in Bagley v. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 5:01 am by Amy Howe
  At The Incidental Economist, Nicholas Bagley contends that several of the Court’s decisions “require Congress to speak with much greater clarity before the courts will impute to it the desire to behave so disrespectfully toward the states. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:41 am by Amy Howe
Coverage and commentary continue to focus on King v. [read post]
1 Feb 2015, 10:35 am by Guest Blogger
Timothy Jost On January 28, 2015, thirty amicus briefs were filed in the Supreme Court supporting the validity of the Internal Revenue Service rule in King v. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 4:07 am by Amy Howe
At The Incidental Economist, Nicholas Bagley weighs in on King v. [read post]