Search for: "United States v. Graham" Results 1041 - 1060 of 1,112
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jun 2013, 7:02 am by Benjamin Wittes
During the Senate debates over the 2012 NDAA, an exasperated Lindsey Graham (R-SC) all but begged detractors to “please read the damn bill. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 7:24 am by Katherine Kelley
Like the original Brookings report, I collected data on sextortion occurring both within and outside of the United States. [read post]
22 Nov 2022, 5:27 pm by Anna Bower
Joshi replies that the court’s precedent has suggested as much in United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2017, 8:44 am by Schachtman
For better or worse, litigation has become an adjunct to regulation in the United States. [read post]
4 Sep 2019, 4:46 am by SHG
The privilege predated this nation, and was explained 180 years ago by the United States Supreme Court in Stein v. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:34 am by Ben
In the UK in FAPL v BT [2017] Mr Justice Arnold concluded that the High Court has the jurisdiction to make an order against an access provider that would require the ISP to block access not to a website but rather streaming servers giving unauthorised access to copyright content - 'live' blocking. [read post]
4 Jul 2018, 1:30 pm by Matthew Scott Johnson
Obasogie & Zachary Newman, The Futile Fourth Amendment: Understanding Police Excessive Force Doctrine Through an Empirical Assessment of Graham v. [read post]
27 Jan 2020, 9:45 am by Jonathan Shaub
” Similarly, while president, Thomas Jefferson responded to a House resolution requesting information about the conspiracy against the United States involving Aaron Burr by providing all information relevant to Burr but withholding other names. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
 At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]
12 Feb 2017, 9:29 pm by RegBlog
“Objective reasonableness” is an appropriate touchstone for regulating force, but the ill-informed Graham v. [read post]