Search for: "Todd v. United States"
Results 141 - 160
of 600
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2018, 10:00 am
WebbBank of the United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Amy Howe analyzes yesterday’s argument in Gamble v. [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 4:32 pm
United States, the U.S. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 9:20 am
See State v. [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 4:09 am
Briefly: At Law360 (subscription required), retired state-court judge George Eskin urges the justices to review Lacaze v. [read post]
10 Sep 2018, 12:59 pm
” Torres v. [read post]
10 Sep 2018, 12:59 pm
” Torres v. [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 5:01 am
Additional follow-on litigation to Johnson has involved questions about other aspects of ACCA’s “violent felony” definition, as in next term’s United States v. [read post]
26 Aug 2018, 9:42 am
Aug. 23, 2018), decision available here; see also United States v. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 4:17 am
Zinke, … their important amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 12:12 pm
The law permits a president to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States,” if he first declares a national emergency under the National Emergencies Act (NEA). [read post]
13 Jul 2018, 9:40 am
In State of California, ex rel, Xavier Becerra v. [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 12:50 pm
In State of California, ex rel, Xavier Becerra v. [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 12:50 pm
” In State of California, ex rel, Xavier Becerra v. [read post]
7 Jul 2018, 5:16 am
Chris Meserole analyzed how technological advancements will impact United States’ military conflicts. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 12:47 pm
The case, Apple v. [read post]
11 Jun 2018, 12:15 pm
Phocatox-v-Wiersig-Complaint [read post]
18 May 2018, 11:16 am
United States. [read post]
14 May 2018, 9:30 pm
In a forthcoming article, Todd F. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 10:41 am
Responding to the government’s argument that the Supreme Court has on previous occasions recognized that a sentencing reduction based upon Section 3582(c)(2) is not governed by the constitutional or remedial holding of United States v. [read post]
