Search for: "James v United States" Results 101 - 120 of 5,274
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
The Great Migration had produced important swing blocs of black voters in northern and border states who in 1930 shocked the nation with their demand that a nominee to the Supreme Court care about racial justice. [read post]
24 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  When Taft assumed the chief justiceship the previous year, the Court was a relatively moderate right-of-center body, as only Justices James C. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 8:57 am by John Mikhail
Justice Scalia was exactly right about this—and for that matter, so was Chief Justice Marshall, who clarified this very point in his circuit opinion in United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 9:30 pm by ernst
Rev. 2135 (2023).ICYMI: "Of Course Presidents Are Officers of the United States," says Mark Graber (The Atlantic). [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 7:00 am by Guest Blogger
  Since then, subsequent additions to the official History of the Supreme Court of the United States have been famously unpunctual, uneven, and mostly unheralded. [read post]
Authors: Ray Giblett, James Morris, Rajaee Rouhani, Stephen Lee, Jeremy Moller, Charles Nugent-Young, Merren Taylor, Timothy Chan, Joshua Kan, Dylan Sault and Steven Li  Welcome to our first wrap up of the year! [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 7:39 pm by Mark Graber
 The specter of Dunning School history haunted oral argument in Anderson v. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 1:02 am by INFORRM
United States Taylor Swift is threatening legal action against the Florida college student who tracks the private jets of celebrities and public figures, including Swift. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 2:26 pm by Eugene Volokh
On a motion by President Shrum, the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma dismissed the suit for lack of standing, ruling that the United States Supreme Court in Summers v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 4:09 pm by INFORRM
Nothing in the post-2013 Act case law suggests that the section 3(3) requirement is any less permissive (see, for example, the first instance decision in Butt v Secretary of State [2017] EWHC 2619 (QB), and particularly Mr Justice Nicol’s comments at [39]. [read post]