Search for: "Born v. State"
Results 1561 - 1580
of 4,833
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Nov 2023, 6:30 am
”[1] Focusing on private funds, Director Grewal stated earlier this year that private funds were a “substantive priority area” for the Division of Enforcement—and that has certainly been borne out in the 2023 docket.[2] I. [read post]
18 Jan 2020, 9:23 am
Because this presumption does not follow in a same-sex marriage, the court ruled according to Pavan v. [read post]
10 Mar 2007, 2:01 pm
(Sah v. [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 5:00 am
Herrick v. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 8:13 am
Indeed, Griffin’s Case was about a state office, and the Court in Trump v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 7:57 pm
Al-Awlaki obviously was obviously hostile to the United States; in an older world, in which our adversaries were also states, he would have lost his US citizenship as a member of the armed forces of another state. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 12:44 pm
Obama, No. 08-4340 In one of the so-called "birther" suits challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to run for and serve as President of the United States based on claims that Obama was born in Kenya and therefore was not a natural born citizen of the United States, dismissal of the action is affirmed where plaintiff lacked standing to bring the suit because he suffered no injury particularized to him [read post]
6 Jun 2008, 7:17 pm
" In his concurrence, Chief Justice Hassell, while joining the court's opinion, wrote, "However, I write separately to state that I have serious concerns about the Court of Appeals' opinion in the former appeal, Miller-Jenkins v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 9:33 am
Justice Black’s opinion in Afroyim v. [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 10:57 am
R. v. [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 10:57 am
R. v. [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 1:01 am
Ginsburg has authored notable majority opinions, including United States v. [read post]
11 Oct 2014, 4:15 pm
., Etc. v. [read post]
16 Feb 2007, 8:31 am
State of Indiana (NFP) Deanna Austin v. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 11:00 am
Two children born during the relationship. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 6:31 am
The Court found that Regulation 3 does not carry the force of law (see Weiss v. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 7:47 am
In K.E.M. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2015, 1:49 pm
The costs of the contraceptive coverage in such a case, in other words, would ultimately be borne by the government itself, rather than by Highmark or UPMC, let alone by Catholic Charities, or the Catholic Charities Health Plan, or the Trust, or the Diocese . . . [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 5:00 pm
It is also broadly consistent with the Supreme Court's June 2023 8-1 decision in United States v. [read post]
15 Jan 2012, 7:44 am
Garcia v. [read post]
