Search for: "People v. Marshall (1990)"
Results 121 - 140
of 145
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2024, 9:01 pm
As Justice Thurgood Marshall put it decades later, “Congress painted with a broad brush,”[14] and its “purpose in enacting the securities laws was to regulate investments, in whatever form they are made and by whatever name they are called. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:43 am
By Amnesty International’s count, since 2001 over 500 people have died in the US as a result of Taser use. [read post]
15 Dec 2023, 12:17 pm
Texas, Collens v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 7:23 am
Authoritarians Abuse Interpol to Persecute Exiled Dissidents The free flow of people, information and finance has helped exiled activists influence public opinion in the otherwise tightly controlled societies that they have fled. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 8:31 am
The overwhelming result of all trials ends in a verdict of guilt for the accused and at that point another state official (bailiff, prison warden, parole officer, etc.) is obligated to apply the decision.[9] However, Dubber clarifies that the reference to the State in the style of cause is not thought to be a requirement for the publicness of a dispute.[10] He cites German cases that refer simply to the ‘Criminal Case against X’; a reference to ‘the… [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 8:28 am
It signals again further movement, perhaps now substantially irreversible, away from the cornerstone of US (and global) policy from the 1990s through about 2'13-2016 of a commitment to build a unitary global economic space through which public-private interlinking could structure a seamless connection between markets driven allocation and the normative principles within which such activity could be conducted. [read post]
30 Jun 2019, 6:30 am
Almost inevitably, as elaborated in Jack Balkin’s extensive ruminations on the book, one is tempted to compare the contexts of the late 1990s and the present with regard to the Court being able to play the crucial role that Lessig assigns it. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:20 pm
The notion that corporations did not have the same free-speech rights as human beings had been practically a given of constitutional law for decades, and the 1990 and 2003 decisions (both joined by Stevens) reflected that consensus. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 10:14 am
Specifically, it asked whether two decisions, from 1990 and 2003, which upheld restrictions on corporate speech, should be overturned. [read post]
28 May 2022, 2:25 pm
First, it’s ridiculous to call the Castle Rock v. [read post]
6 Dec 2007, 11:20 am
Marshal retrieve him. [read post]
9 Mar 2021, 7:36 am
In Branzburg v. [read post]
14 Jan 2008, 6:26 pm
We are a tolerant people, living in a tolerant country. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 7:39 am
In Massachusetts v. [read post]
20 Jun 2009, 4:46 am
While other people seeking entry or residency to Canada have encountered nothing but a locked door and an unwelcome mat. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 7:54 pm
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] On January 18, Professor Akhil Reed Amar and Professor Vikram Amar filed an amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 12:16 pm
Nelson v. [read post]
13 Jan 2008, 1:23 pm
A meta-analysis of empirical studies containing a total of 1,717 subjects found that 28% of sex offenders reported a history of childhood sexual abuse, (Hanson & Slater, 1988) significantly greater than the 17% rate of sexual victimization of boys in the general population suggested by Hunter (1990). [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm
Efficiency and Competition Congress updated Rayburn’s work in the 1970s and again in the 1990s to mandate that, in addition to investor protection and public interest, our agency consider efficiency and competition, as well as capital formation, in formulating our rules.[5] They understood that lowering the cost in the middle of our capital markets would help lower costs for issuers and raise returns for investors. [read post]
4 Nov 2013, 9:46 am
Over the last month, on our New Republic: Security States newsfeed, we rolled out a series designed to explain why fairly allocating the costs of software deficiencies between software makers and users is so critical to addressing the growing problem of vulnerability-ridden code—and how such a regime will require questioning some of our deep-seated beliefs about the very nature of software security. [read post]
