Search for: "Barrett v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 1,493
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Dec 2020, 4:26 am by SHG
By the time Indiana appealed its loss at the Seventh Circuit, SCOTUS would include Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and many court-watchers wondered whether the change to the bench would result in the Court’s eroding its landmark decision in  Obergefell v. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 3:00 am by John Day
  The Bottom Line: “Barrett filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(6). [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 7:02 am by Bernard Bell
§§ 2000bb to 2000bb-4)(“the RFRA”).[6] (Even though the RFRA was held unconstitutional as applied to state and local governments, City of Boerne v. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 3:12 am by jonathanturley
After the leak of the draft opinion, the New York Times opinion editors warned that some states likely would outlaw interracial marriage if Roe v. [read post]
30 Dec 2021, 1:58 pm by Holly Brezee
Asbill  On July 9th, 2020, the United States Supreme Court handed down its decision in McGirt v. [read post]
14 Jul 2022, 2:29 pm by Josh Blackman
") Finally, lurking in the background is yet another United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2020, 1:54 pm by Josh Blackman
You stated the Supreme Court would have the final word as far as the lower courts are concerned. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:58 am by INFORRM
In an earlier post on this blog, I considered the potential impact on the First Amendment of Thomas J’s originalist reasoning in the Second Amendment case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, and found some distinctly chilly zephyrs. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 5:28 am by Amy Howe
At the blog of the National Conference of State Legislatures, Lisa Soronen looks ahead to Fisher v. [read post]
9 May 2018, 4:28 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  In Barrett v Goldstein  2018 NY Slip Op 03325  Decided on May 8, 2018  Appellate Division, First Department we see a situation in which a post-nuptial agreement that is poor for plaintiff is left in place, and none of the reviewing attorneys can be held responsible. [read post]