Search for: "Power v. Holder"
Results 1801 - 1820
of 2,842
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Feb 2013, 2:55 pm
In South Carolina v. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 8:43 am
Holder symposium comes from Daniel P. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 2:22 pm
One of the glaring things revealed by a review of the briefs in Shelby County v. [read post]
5 Feb 2013, 3:44 pm
As I noted then, the Attorney General’s invocation of the balancing test for due process articulated in Mathews v. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 7:04 pm
The paper omits crucial language from Mathews v. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 11:34 am
Against the back drop of Dred Scott v. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 6:35 am
Fteja v. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 9:01 pm
Next month, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 2:19 am
See Exhibit A (InterDigital Communications Corp. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 5:00 am
In Gallagher v. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 6:16 pm
The Court on December 7 agreed to review the constitutionality of Section 3 in the case of U.S. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 3:08 pm
In 2006, the Delhi High Court in the case of the Scotch Whisky Association v. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 5:00 am
Republished by Blog Post Promoter Reuters reports that in Perfect 10, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2013, 9:37 am
The Policy intends to position India among the top five global scientific powers by 2020, facilitate S&T-based high-risk innovations through new mechanisms; facilitate partnerships among stake holders for scaling successes of R&D; and trigger changes in the mindset and value systems to recognize, respect and reward performances which create wealth from S&T derived knowledge. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 7:22 am
(In my initial post, I provided more background on the history and justification for the executive’s “enforce-but-don’t-defend” practice reflected in the Holder letter.) [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 8:55 am
Airways v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 8:05 am
In the Proposition 8 case, Hollingsworth v. [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 10:42 am
For example, consider the Fifth Circuit decision from 2009, United States v. [read post]
15 Jan 2013, 9:01 pm
If the nation reaches the moment of truth, the President should declare that he will not default on the obligations of the United States government—including all required payments to veterans, health- care providers, debt holders, Social Security recipients, and so on. [read post]
