Search for: "-BMK I. v. Department of Education" Results 101 - 120 of 2,826
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Mar 2024, 1:52 pm by NARF
Hawaiian education in Hawaiʻi’s public schools: A path to reasonable access. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 12:06 pm
  Matter of James Cotter v Board of Education of Garden City Union Free School District Board of Education Back in 2008, I wrote about a Nassau County Supreme Court Decision (J. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 12:17 pm by Jim Gerl
 This has been a concern of the U S Department of Education. [read post]
20 Jan 2009, 12:35 am
Justice Department drew upon letter from Secretary of State Dean Acheson in its brief in Brown v. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 10:13 am
A very interesting and, as best I can tell, almost entirely unnoticed court case, Campion, Barrow & Assocs. of Ill. v. [read post]
30 Nov 2021, 6:03 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Court reasons that the religious accommodation provisions are probably unconstititionalThe case is Kane v. [read post]
15 Feb 2014, 2:46 pm by Jim Gerl
Department of Education400 Maryland Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20202Dear Mr. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 1:59 pm by Gary Rosin
The ABA Section of Legal Education must itself be "accredited"--recognized as a law-school accrediting agency by the Department of Education. [read post]
31 May 2016, 10:36 am by Orin Kerr
Having blogged recently about Judge Andrew Hanen’s odd order in the DAPA immigration case, in which Hanen ordered the creation of a new continuing legal education requirement for Justice Department lawyers, I thought I would flag the Justice Department’s relatively short response to the order that was filed this morning. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
I would prefer that universities and their departments generally not take stands on various controversial public policy questions or legal questions. [read post]
22 Aug 2016, 2:30 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Under Chevron, I would expect the Education Department to prevail should it ever issue a rule interpreting Title IX to cover transgender individuals in this way. [read post]