Search for: "People v. Jones (1997)" Results 121 - 140 of 182
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Feb 2011, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
The conflict is not between princes and people, as it was in the 16th and 17th centuries, but between individual communicators and a multiplicity of laws… What is plainly required is an international agreement to govern communications on the web and, in particular, to determine whether they are to be regulated by an agreed set of supra-national regulations or, if not, to provide a generally acceptable means of deciding which domestic law should apply to any offending publication. [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 2:43 am by SHG
Yet that is precisely what the court did by a 9-to-0 vote in the 1997 case of Clinton v. [read post]
17 Jan 2011, 3:13 pm by Betsy McKenzie
And people do not understand what they are signing up for. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 1:25 pm by NL
Not least because I get to use the word 'Snook' without people pointing at me and laughing. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 1:25 pm by NL
Not least because I get to use the word 'Snook' without people pointing at me and laughing. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 2:59 am
  In May, 2010, wedding food also hospitalized at least one hundred people in Northern India. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:20 pm by carie
”On September 9th last year, Stevens engaged in a classic version of advocacy-by-interrogation during the argument of Citizens United v. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 8:59 am by Tom Goldstein
Supreme Court retirements inevitably produce much more coverage of process than substance. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:50 am
Another memorable ruling by Stevens came in 1997 in Clinton v Jones, regarding Paula Jones' civil lawsuit against President Bill Clinton - which launched a chain of events leading to Clinton's impeachment. [read post]