Search for: "Long Corporation v. the United States"
Results 1681 - 1700
of 3,660
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2014, 4:49 am
Under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, the government generally “has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content” (United States v Stevens, 559 US 460, 468 [2010] [internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]
2 Mar 2013, 2:37 pm
On the 2012 Roundtable, see, Paper Delivered at the 2012 Penn State Law and Semiotics Roundtable: The Corporation as Semiosis, “Citizens United,” the Signification of the Corporate Enterprise and the Development of Law Law at the End of the Day, March 3, 2012; on the 2011 Roundtable see Larry Catá Backer, The 2011 Kevelson Workshop on Law and Semiotics at Penn State--Outstanding Student Presentations, Law at the End of… [read post]
26 Jan 2018, 6:00 am
Lastly, Kaspersky claims that it has standing to assert Fifth Amendment due process rights because it has “substantial connections” to the United States based on its employment of 300 people in Massachusetts and its sales to customers and thus, comes under the framework announced in United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 7:23 am
"--Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New YorkOpinion Date: 6/3/09Cite: American Airlines, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2018, 4:24 pm
In reality, the law gives everyone in the United States those privacy rights due to the difficulty and expense corporations would experience trying to distinguish Californians from residents of the other 49 states online. [read post]
20 May 2017, 5:23 am
And no, the world did not stop while the United States gazed at the presidential navel. [read post]
15 Mar 2007, 12:40 pm
On appeal Miller argues that the state appellate court unreasonably concluded that McShane's performance at sentencing was not deficient or prejudicial, and he further contends that United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 8:56 pm
United States, ex rel. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 11:58 pm
Considering how many cert petitions the SCOTUS has to decide on at any given point in time, one may or (as I do) may not believe that an incredibly deep analysis of such questions as whether declaring code is more or less functional than other program code has occurred so far.As for the second question, I would be thoroughly surprised if the Department of Justice determined that Google's agenda in this context is in the interest of the United States. [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 8:04 am
Trump v. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 8:15 pm
Yesterday, the Illinois Supreme Court filed its long-awaited opinion in Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condominium Association. [read post]
12 Jan 2023, 11:19 am
United States, 139 S.Ct. 2116, 2123 (U.S., 2019) (citing Mistretta v. [read post]
12 Jan 2023, 11:19 am
United States, 139 S.Ct. 2116, 2123 (U.S., 2019) (citing Mistretta v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 5:23 am
Under United States v. [read post]
8 Apr 2020, 6:00 am
§ 1158(b)(2)(A)(v). [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 2:11 pm
The Caronia Effect For this reason, many observers saw the December 2012 decision in United States v. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:12 am
Sanofi-Aventis United States LLP, 806 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2015). [read post]
10 Jan 2023, 1:56 pm
” Flowers responded: “As long as congressional intent is interpreted with respect to the statute. [read post]
21 Oct 2012, 9:46 am
It went to the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 11:29 am
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that MCAC is not a state actor and granted the motion to dismiss. [read post]
