Search for: "United States v. Booth" Results 161 - 180 of 257
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2010, 5:25 am by Susan Brenner
United States, 265 U.S. 57 (1924), which stated that `the special protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment to the people in their ‘persons, houses, papers, and effects,’ is not extended to the open fields. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 5:45 am by Robert Brammer
The following is a guest post by Clare Feikert-Ahalt, foreign law specialist for the United Kingdom at the Law Library of Congress. [read post]
3 Dec 2022, 7:08 am
 Pix Credit hereWhile interest in this case, HKSAR v Lai Man Ling [2022] 4 HKC 410, [2022] HKDC 355, reported in September 2022, may be diminishing, its relevance requires sustained examination. [read post]
23 Jul 2019, 11:38 am by Vishnu Kannan
  The Supreme Court’s application of Fourth Amendment protection to the attachment of a GPS tracking device to a car in United States v. [read post]
4 Jul 2010, 1:38 pm
Kozinksi was channeling Justice Brandeis’s words dissenting in United States v. [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 3:32 am by Russ Bensing
United States, a wiretapping case. [read post]
15 Aug 2024, 6:00 am by Guest Blogger
The book argues that the binary state-versus-federal-government model that is today taken to be the essence of American federalism does not correspond to the legal or political reality of the United States in the early nineteenth century. [read post]
4 Feb 2018, 1:10 pm by Deborah Pearlstein
 As Huntington put it: “The separation of powers ... has been a major hindrance to the development of military professionalism and civilian control in the United States. [read post]
4 Feb 2018, 1:10 pm by Deborah Pearlstein
 As Huntington put it: “The separation of powers ... has been a major hindrance to the development of military professionalism and civilian control in the United States. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 9:40 pm by Adam Wagner
We posted: It is unsurprising, therefore, that more questions are being asked as to whether our judges are properly qualified to understand and rule on such controversial areas, even to the extent of looking more closely at their religious beliefs; something which is common in relation to the United States Supreme Court but until now has been unusual in the UK. [read post]