Search for: "Barrett Co. v. United States" Results 41 - 60 of 244
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jul 2020, 10:45 am by Guest Blogger
The two phrases—“officers of the United States” and “office under the United States”—are seen as co-extensive. [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 11:31 am by Josh Blackman
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] Recently, the Supreme Court decided Financial Oversight and Management Bd. for Puerto Rico v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm by Josh Blackman
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] In our view, the phrase "Officers of the United States" does not refer to the President. [read post]
15 May 2020, 4:30 am by Josh Blackman
[Co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in two faithless elector cases. [read post]
23 Oct 2006, 3:43 am by Tobias Thienel
United Kingdom, at para. 36), whereas conversely, the inability of the police to commit a certain tort in English law (as a point of substantive law) is often described as an ‘immunity’ (see for criticism of this terminology Barrett v. [read post]
30 Mar 2023, 10:58 am by Jeffrey Bellin
Looking for a clear rule Caroline Flynn, assistant to the solicitor general, argues for the United States. [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 10:19 am by Coleman Saunders
” The brief of the United States, arguing in support of petitioners, criticized the decisions of the circuit court and outlined the position of the United States regarding the expropriation exception. [read post]
30 Jun 2021, 6:25 pm by Mark Latham
ShareThe Supreme Court held 5-4 in PennEast Pipeline Co. v. [read post]