Search for: "Apt v. United States"
Results 41 - 60
of 437
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2018, 8:00 am
United States, in Trump v. [read post]
30 Oct 2021, 12:18 pm
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
5 Mar 2019, 6:41 pm
Apte v. [read post]
4 May 2021, 1:08 pm
United States. [read post]
17 Nov 2016, 11:34 pm
United States decision as "precedent" for this plan. [read post]
13 Nov 2016, 2:39 pm
Strieff in the Era of Aggressive Policing," which goes on Grits' to-read list:On June 20, 2016, the United States Supreme Court held in Utah v. [read post]
Case o' The Week: Bad Cops Make Good Law, Quon -- Fourth Amendment Privacy Interests in Text Content
22 Jun 2008, 3:55 pm
United States v. [read post]
8 May 2017, 8:57 am
See, United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 2:41 am
Apte v. [read post]
25 Nov 2008, 1:17 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 Feb 2010, 12:17 pm
From United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 10:00 am
United States for being unconstitutionally vague under the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 4:47 pm
My coauthor, Andrew Green, and I argue that the singular focus on the policy preferences of Supreme Court justices is apt to miss an important dimension of Court dynamics--the degree to which the justices engage in cooperative decision-making.Here's the abstract:Over the past 25 years, the justices of the Supreme Court of Canada have not exhibited the divergent policy views along party lines that have been characteristic of the justices of the United States… [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 7:05 am
United States and United States v. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 2:09 pm
(citing United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 12:35 pm
And in United States v. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 12:30 am
United States. [read post]
8 Mar 2022, 10:26 am
Congress amended ACCA to include the clause in order to ensconce the solicitor general’s position in United States v. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 2:35 am
In light of the issues presented by United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 9:09 pm
” United States v. [read post]