Search for: "Utter v. Utter" Results 121 - 140 of 2,611
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2023, 12:52 pm by Guy Charles
But what makes Milligan remarkable for me is its utter conventionality. [read post]
2 Jun 2023, 4:33 am by jonathanturley
” Those words from President Joe Biden were his response to the Supreme Court reaffirming the individual rights under the Second Amendment in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
1 Jun 2023, 3:29 am by SHG
Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling in Bostock v Clayton County, which held that Title VII’s ban on sex discrimination also extended to transgender and gay workers. [read post]
21 May 2023, 9:00 pm by Neil H. Buchanan and Michael C. Dorf
As the country and the world await news of whether Republicans’ decision to use the debt ceiling as a political weapon will lead to utter catastrophe, pundits and reporters alike are asking whether there is an out that would allow the Democrats to sidestep the Republicans’ attempted extortion.The question is: “out” from what, exactly? [read post]
15 May 2023, 10:58 am by Eric Goldman
If you’ve ever uttered one of these phrases, I hope that ends today. * * * BONUS: Along the lines of the Internet as a “lawless” zone, I am similarly perplexed by characterizations of the Internet as a “Wild West. [read post]
11 May 2023, 9:00 pm by Vikram David Amar
But that notion is inconsistent with the seminal compelled-speech case, Wooley v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 2:32 am by centerforartlaw
By Sophia Williams From 1933 to 1945, during the Nazi party’s rise to power, the Nazis looted, confiscated, or involuntarily transferred more than half a million artworks owned by Jewish art collectors and other victims.[1] Following Nazi party looting before and after World War II, thousands of artworks ended up in museum collections around the world, including in New York, and remain there today.[2] A recent act passed in August 2022 “to amend the education law, in relation to notice… [read post]
2 May 2023, 2:00 am
”Even if spoken in a loud and disrespectful manner, the ALJ found that the words uttered by VMC to be “sufficiently vague,” did not “constitute an expressed or implied threat,” and concluded that the “threatening language” charge was not supported by a “preponderance of the evidence. [read post]