Search for: "Barrett v. State"
Results 1221 - 1240
of 1,956
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jun 2023, 9:01 am
In 2019, in Rucho v. [read post]
22 May 2024, 4:03 am
Group 48, LP v. [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 12:58 pm
The Supreme Court heard telephonic argument on Monday in Salinas v. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 6:23 am
Citing a series of California and federal cases (including Barrett v. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 10:48 am
As Justice Blackmun presciently stated in his dissent in Webster v. [read post]
3 Oct 2012, 12:54 pm
See Barrett v. [read post]
25 May 2010, 8:07 am
(Also see: Barrett v. [read post]
30 Oct 2020, 11:41 am
Amy Coney Barrett’s Judicial Philosophy Doesn’t Hold Up to Scrutiny By Angus King Jr., United States Senator, Maine and Heather Cox Richardson, Professor of History, Boston College Angus King Jr. and Heather Cox Richardson argue against originalism—the method of legal interpretation that favors interpreting the Constitution or laws based strictly on their original meaning—and for an interpretative philosophy that looks to the ideals and intent of the… [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 5:03 am
" Barrett v. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 1:40 pm
Whether McGirt v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 9:23 am
Looking primarily at the plain language of the statute, and guided by the 2006 California case of Barrett v. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 12:27 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 6:24 am
Ct. 2783 (2008) and McDonald v. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 7:43 am
The justices’ eventual opinion in Mississippi v. [read post]
2 Dec 2020, 2:37 pm
Both Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett suggested collapsing the test into a single inquiry deriving from South Carolina v. [read post]
28 Feb 2025, 1:09 pm
Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. and Dewberry Group, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 5:11 am
United States, 294 U.S. 330 (1935); Nortz v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 2:23 am
Barrett, states, “Non-machine-implemented methods, because of their abstract nature, present §101 issues. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 1:57 pm
The majority opinion by Justice Barrett, and concurring arguments by Justice Gorsuch, addressed questions about Congressional power over Indian affairs, tribal sovereignty, and equal protection. [read post]
