Search for: "Black v. United States"
Results 41 - 60
of 3,369
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2019, 11:12 am
Picasso case (United States District Court for the Northern District of California). [read post]
7 Oct 2019, 8:41 am
Louisiana October 7, 2019 – Today, the United States Supreme Court will hear arguments in Ramos v. [read post]
6 Oct 2019, 9:53 am
Barnette, No. 591, Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1942, at 46. [read post]
6 Oct 2019, 3:37 am
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm
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
“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
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, 6:38 am
STATE V. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 5:42 am
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]
26 Sep 2019, 11:51 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 2:03 pm
Facts: This case (Cone et al v. [read post]
24 Sep 2019, 7:17 am
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
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]
23 Sep 2019, 4:00 am
Holder, Citizens United v. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 8:00 am
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
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
Ritchie and Kay Whitlock Race and the Death Penalty: The Legacy of “McCleskey v. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am
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
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
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]
