Search for: "JONES v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"
Results 101 - 120
of 487
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2012, 7:17 am
The Justice Department declined to comment. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 9:30 pm
Weeks, 297 U.S. 135 (1936), and Elgin, Joliet R. v. [read post]
30 May 2019, 8:11 am
By a 7-2 margin (meaning it won the support of Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan), the court summarily reversed the U.S. [read post]
5 Apr 2021, 11:09 pm
The answer is Bob Jones v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 1:41 pm
Based on the ruling of U.S. v. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 8:46 am
The ABA Journal is now reporting on a story that had been first reported in Mother Jones. [read post]
2 Mar 2019, 6:57 am
Eliot Kim summarized the Supreme Court’s ruling in Jam v. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 2:38 pm
Photo: U.S. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 12:38 pm
Horgan, Ted Sampsell Jones 5. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 4:50 pm
’ U.S. v. [read post]
10 May 2020, 9:01 pm
Jones. [read post]
6 Apr 2007, 2:29 am
Here, by contrast, neither the FTC nor the Justice Department has weighed in on the issue before the Supreme Court. [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 4:05 am
Murphy, the Justice Department “worried that a Native American death penalty case at the U.S. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 12:47 pm
The Justice Department, however, successfully convinced the U.S. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 6:53 am
Jones, __ U.S. __, 132 S.Ct. 945 (2012), a case about the use of a GPS device to track a suspect’s car, a majority of Justices of the United States Supreme Court appeared to conclude that protracted, long-term surveillance may compromise a reasonable expectation of privacy even when the same type of surveillance, done briefly, does not. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 6:53 am
Jones, __ U.S. __, 132 S.Ct. 945 (2012), a case about the use of a GPS device to track a suspect’s car, a majority of Justices of the United States Supreme Court appeared to conclude that protracted, long-term surveillance may compromise a reasonable expectation of privacy even when the same type of surveillance, done briefly, does not. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 11:22 am
Jones and United States v. [read post]
2 Apr 2022, 9:44 am
Robert Chesney and Steve Vladeck shared an episode of the National Security Law Podcast, in which they sat down with Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen to talk about the Justice Department’s National Security Division: Andrew Mines argued that there is a growing problem of extremism in the U.S. military. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 2:35 pm
Not since 1988, when Justice Scalia dissented alone as the Court (in Morrison v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 11:23 am
The Department of Justice has filed a motion with the Supreme Court requesting that the Court wait for the 4th Circuit decision before deciding on this matter. [read post]
