Search for: "Moore v. Read" Results 101 - 120 of 1,624
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Feb 2023, 2:38 pm by Rick Hasen
With news today that the Supreme Court cancelled oral argument in the Title 42 case on immigration after the Biden DOJ informed the Court that the Title 42 policy will end in a few months with the end of the… Continue reading The post Why Haven’t the Parties in Moore v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 9:45 am by Rick Hasen
It adds: “Although the Court has pending before it another petition for certiorari raising a similar question… Continue reading The post United States Files Letter in Supreme Court Saying that Moore v. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 5:27 am by Michael Arkfeld
In a must read decision, the plaintiffs in the Da Silva Moore v. [read post]
However, at least in the context presented by Moore — congressional… Continue reading [read post]
26 Jan 2017, 7:05 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Here are updated orders in Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 6:24 am by Ellena Erskine
ShareThe court will hear oral argument in Harrington v. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 10:09 am by Rick Hasen
That gives plenty of time for the North Carolina Supreme Court to do what I expect, which is to reverse the earlier holding that partisan gerrymandering violates the North Carolina constitution, before the Supreme Court… Continue reading The post North Carolina Supreme Court Schedules March 14 Oral Argument in Rehearing in Harper, the Partisan Gerrymandering Case that Could Moot Moore v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 7:55 am by Rick Hasen
I noted on the blog the other day that the state of Georgia, after losing in the state court of appeals, declined to appeal further the ruling that Georgia law allows counties to set Saturday as a day of early… Continue reading The post If Petitioners Get Their Way in Moore v. [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 8:39 pm by Patent Docs
This is a question that comes readily to mind when reading the Federal Circuit's opinion (and Chief Judge Moore's dissent) in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. [read post]