Search for: "Bush v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" Results 121 - 140 of 526
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Aug 2011, 8:57 am by Big Tent Democrat
For the endless presidential power debate, I wonder how it is people think that abortion is still legal in the United States of America. [read post]
28 Jan 2024, 8:39 am by Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A.
United States of America, 134 So. 3d 894 (Fla. 2014), was a case involving a military veteran whose death was caused by medical negligence. [read post]
23 Dec 2019, 7:23 am by Simon Lester
Whether USMCA overall is better or worse overall than the original NAFTA will not be fully clear until USMCA has been in force for some time, and different stakeholders (e.g., automotive producers versus labor unions, the United States v. [read post]
5 Sep 2021, 7:01 am by Sara Bjerg Moller
The Bush administration feared that the United States could then be asked to intervene against domestic terrorist attacks in NATO treaty states in the future. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 6:45 am by Joshua Matz
At the San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz discusses United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 6:45 am by Joshua Matz
At the San Jose Mercury News, Howard Mintz discusses United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 1:30 pm
In a crushing blow to consumers, on Thursday, February 21st, the United States Supreme Court again sided with big pharmaceutical medical device makers. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 4:47 am by mlhale
Michael Ratner is President of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a nonprofit legal organization dedicated to protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. [read post]
11 Dec 2020, 2:00 am
While each State is sovereign in itself, it submits that sovereignty, through the Constitution to which it accedes, to the overall authority of the United States of America -- which includes its three branches of government. [read post]
14 May 2007, 8:49 am
It includes not only active participants in hostilities but also anyone who "purposefully and materially" supported attacks on the United States or its allies -- language that arguably encompasses anyone who sent money to a banned group or food to a combatant son. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 1:59 pm by Danielle Citron, Helen Norton
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. [read post]