Search for: "United States v. Cornell" Results 121 - 140 of 808
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Mar 2010, 9:34 am by Hannah Buxbaum
  So jurisdiction in the case would be based not on effects within the United States -- an easier case for regulation, since U.S. investors would be involved -- but on conduct within the United States. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 3:54 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks whether the residual clause of the sentencing guidelines is unconstitutionally vague. [read post]
2 Sep 2024, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
The Fall 2024 lineup for the University of Pennsylvania Legal History Workshop is below:September 12th, 2024: Jonathan Gienapp (Stanford University), "The People of the United States: The Lost Constitution of National Popular Sovereignty"September 26th, 2024: Ofra Bloch (Tel Aviv University, Buchmann Faculty of Law), “Students for Fair Admissions v. [read post]
4 Mar 2025, 12:25 pm by Lawrence Solum
Second, famous jury verdicts as well as Learned Hand’s reasoning in United States v. [read post]
2 Oct 2018, 4:11 am by Edith Roberts
United States, in which the justices will consider whether a provision of the federal sex-offender act violates the nondelegation doctrine. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 4:02 am by Edith Roberts
Today the justices will hear argument in one case, United States v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
Supreme Court recently heard argument in Glossip v. [read post]
12 Sep 2021, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
In the United States, however, constitutional adjudication does not work that way. [read post]
30 Oct 2017, 3:41 am by Edith Roberts
Amanda Wong and Jared Ham preview the case for Cornell. [read post]
10 Oct 2018, 4:04 am by Edith Roberts
Stitt and United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
The standard the City urged for reviewing a facial challenge used language from United States v. [read post]
28 Feb 2017, 3:43 am by Edith Roberts
United States, in which the justices will consider whether mandatory statutory gun-sentencing provisions may limit a district court’s discretion under the advisory sentencing guidelines. [read post]