Search for: "People v High"
Results 981 - 1000
of 15,043
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jul 2023, 11:43 am
Nine years after Bakke, McCleskey v. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 10:39 am
Last month, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Haaland v. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 4:19 am
If the view that diversity is malarkey crosses the line, what of the view that white people should be castrated or Asians should be denied entry into Harvard or Thomas Jefferson High? [read post]
10 Jul 2023, 2:18 pm
Right, I am back from a two week holiday (it was lovely thank you) so onwards… Crescent Trustees Limited v Behjat. [read post]
10 Jul 2023, 11:15 am
This episode is a follow-up podcast to Episode 9, Epic v. [read post]
10 Jul 2023, 4:00 am
In Department of Education v. [read post]
9 Jul 2023, 4:35 pm
The UK Cabinet Office is to hand over Whatsapp messages concerning the government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic to the public inquiry, following the High Court’s rejection of their challenge, Cabinet Office v Chair of Covid Inquiry [2023] EWHC 1702 (Admin). [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 4:33 pm
An approach more aware of regular people’s concerns must therefore come from the agencies and their work in the courts. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 2:31 pm
Carey v. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 9:14 am
From L.W. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 5:47 am
In view of the high stakes of constitutionalizing areas of public policy, any such right must be defined with care. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 4:11 am
CanadaWard v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:49 pm
See R. v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:16 pm
In the case of Kuciemba v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 3:58 am
In Justice Neil Gorsuch’s major free speech ruling in 303 Creative LLC v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 3:00 am
Life sentence in high-profile Ohio rape case. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 7:49 am
—Daniel Akaka 1Aquilina v. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 5:01 am
From State v. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 2:11 pm
In Lee v. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 7:45 am
Austin Kocher recently noted, those glitches have impacted who gets those appointments: the initial release of CBP One was accompanied by a variety of tech failures that did not necessarily undermine CBP’s ability to fill up its appointments calendar for asylum seekers but did create barriers to entry for migrants who were less tech savvy, could not access high-speed Internet, were part of larger families, or, either directly or indirectly, migrants who were darker-skinned or Black.5… [read post]
