Search for: "Black v. United States" Results 41 - 60 of 3,369
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Oct 2019, 11:12 am
Picasso case (United States District Court for the Northern District of California). [read post]
6 Oct 2019, 9:53 am by Samuel Bray
Barnette, No. 591, Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1942, at 46. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
The plaintiffs emphasize the long history of Virginia mandating disclosure of race as a means of enforcing the state’s anti-miscegenation laws prior to the Supreme Court’s 1967 decision in Loving v. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 12:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
“Kansas’s arguments ignore the reality of license suspension practices in the United States, and the dangers of suspicionless stops to drivers of color, particularly black drivers. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 10:01 am by Kalvis Golde
It is our experience that current constitutional law doctrines are best understood as the result of a 200+ year process of decision-making by a single court: the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 5:42 am by Zak Goldstein
In the instant case, the residence in question was a single living unit, not a multi-tenant unit as stated in the above hypothetical. [read post]
24 Sep 2019, 7:17 am by Alethea Redfern
First, the court emphasised that the judgement was not about when and on what terms the United Kingdom is to leave the European Union, but only concerned the question of whether the advice given to the Queen was lawful. [read post]
24 Sep 2019, 6:47 am by Unknown author
The United States Patent and Trademark Office specifies what cannot be patented, including among other things: laws of nature, natural phenomena, abstract ideas, and inventions that are offensive. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 8:00 am by Ronald Collins
For example, there is Justice Hugo Black’s generous application of originalism in his dissent in Adamson v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 9:56 am by Eugene Volokh
United States, the Supreme Court upheld the denial of a tax exemption to a university that banned interracial dating by its students, and that threatened to expel students who violated the ban.[7] Likewise, in Christian Legal Society v. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 7:56 am by Alicia Maule
Ritchie and Kay Whitlock Race and the Death Penalty: The Legacy of “McCleskey v. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am by CMS
Lord Keen QC submits that this reasoning was disregarded by the Inner House in favour of an inference. 15:52: Lady Black asked if Parliament could have decided not to go into recess. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 9:06 am by Matthew Davie
The issues were: (1) whether ECHR Article 8 was engaged; (2) whether the SWP’s activities were “in accordance with the law”; and (3) whether the SWP’s activities were “necessary in a democratic society” in the interests of one of the objectives stated in Article 8(2), in accordance with the four-part test set out by the UK Supreme Court in Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) [2014] AC 700. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 7:28 am by CMS
In England & Wales, Gina Millar (the businesswoman who brought the UK Supreme Court appeal of R (on the application of Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5) also raised proceedings, following the Queen’s signing of the Order in Council. [read post]