Search for: "U.S. v. Lopez*"
Results 161 - 180
of 793
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Oct 2018, 5:02 am
Henry v. [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 5:48 am
Allison, 2009 U.S. [read post]
10 Jan 2007, 10:03 am
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTIONUnited States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2025, 9:28 am
See Lozman v. [read post]
12 Dec 2010, 2:31 pm
Greenwood, 2010 U.S. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 4:27 am
July 18, 2005); U.S. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2017, 9:50 am
U.S. [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 8:01 am
Government computer deportation records admitted under public records hearsay exception and did not violate the Confrontation Clause, in United States v. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 6:01 am
Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687; Ardolino v. [read post]
26 Sep 2016, 1:33 pm
Sometimes it's hard to figure out what's going on inside the Ninth Circuit.Today the Ninth Circuit takes this case en banc. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 11:59 am
Whoa. [read post]
21 May 2021, 1:41 pm
Add today's opinion to the legion of statutory interpretation cases about whether "and" means "and" or "or".For the record: For this statute, the panel says it means "and". [read post]
31 Mar 2016, 3:16 pm
Judge Berzon concurs in today's opinion and says that, although it's not argued here, maybe she'd find a right under the Due Process Clause to be informed of the true reason for your arrest, rather than be told a made-up story by the police about why you were busted. [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 12:59 pm
An Obama appointee writes an opinion that says that someone should be locked up longer for illegal reentry after deportation, and a Bush appointee dissents, saying that he should be locked up for less.What a world. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 12:15 pm
That darn Westlaw. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 5:26 pm
Want to see an opinion that's a great example of statutory interpretation? [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 2:37 pm
Boyd v. [read post]
16 Jan 2008, 10:00 am
Supreme Court's analysis, please use this link: New York State Board of Elections v. [read post]
13 May 2007, 8:23 am
United States v. [read post]
2 May 2010, 7:24 am
United States v. [read post]
