Search for: "Armour v. Indianapolis"
Results 21 - 40 of 51
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2012, 6:30 am by Kiran Bhat
Yesterday the Court heard arguments in Armour v. [read post]
16 Jun 2012, 3:13 pm by Kurt T. Koehler
Howards and Justice Breyer giving the summary for the opinion in Armour v. [read post]
11 Sep 2011, 9:00 pm
Supreme Court will decide this fall whether to accept the appeal, Armour v. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 7:44 am by Calvin Massey
In Armour v, City of Indianapolis the Supreme Court ruled that equal protection was not violated by the city's decision to treat these taxpayers unequally.  [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 2:59 pm by Kelly Phillips Erb
  Image via Wikipedia The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in the case of Armour, et al., v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 9:01 pm by Kali Borkoski
Following opinions the Court will hear oral argument in Armour v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 10:54 am by Lyle Denniston
The other case set for that day, Armour v. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 8:14 am by Kali Borkoski
Justice Breyer announced the first opinion, in Armour v. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 9:00 am
I think the answer is no, but he joined a dissenting opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts, in Armour v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 6:32 am by Nabiha Syed
Briefly: Lyle Denniston of this blog previews this week’s oral argument in Armour v. [read post]
2 Mar 2012, 6:37 am by Joshua Matz
Ruthann Robson of the Constitutional Law Prof Blog reports on highlights from the oral argument in Armour v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 5:18 am by Joe Palazzolo
Wednesday, Feb. 29 • The Supreme Court will hear arguments in Armour v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 6:47 am by Marissa Miller
Briefly: Maureen Groppe of the Indianapolis Star previews Wednesday’s oral arguments in Armour v. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 11:47 am by Lyle Denniston
Unless the state’s promise of equality actually also embraced a refund for those worse off, the differing outcomes for the taxpayers are not unconstitutional, the Court declared by a 6-3 vote in Armour, et al., v. [read post]