Search for: "Smith v. People" Results 1421 - 1440 of 3,931
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2009, 12:14 pm
Their Lordships don’t for example, deal with Hussain, Mowan, Smith v Scott etc in any detail. [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 4:08 am by Edith Roberts
Smith, in which the court two years ago struck down an Arkansas law that required the names of both mothers and fathers on birth certificates but not the names of both parents in same-sex marriages as inconsistent with Obergefell v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 5:00 am
  People disregard adequate warnings all the time.So we fight the heeding presumption whenever it comes up. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am by Marty Lederman
 This claim is, of course, deeply counterintuitive, and it would be very awkward, to say the least, for the Supreme Court to explain to the American people that Section 3 doesn’t apply to someone who’s been President because although that person held an “office,” it wasn’t an office “of the United States. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 7:00 am by Bob Ambrogi
“Some people think that this is a magic machine that will crank out an answer,” Smith said. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 12:51 pm
A Service from the ABA Criminal Justice Section, http://www.abanet.org/crimjust United States v. [read post]