Search for: "Branch v. White" Results 1 - 20 of 1,412
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Apr 2019, 7:00 am by Jonathan Shaub
The individual does not have the authority to waive that privilege, and agency regulations, called Touhy regulations after the Supreme Court case Touhy v. [read post]
4 May 2018, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
(v)    showcase innovative initiatives by faith-based and community organizations that serve and strengthen individuals, families, and communities throughout the United States;(vi)   notify the Attorney General ... of concerns raised by faith-based and community organizations about any failures of the executive branch to comply with protections of Federal law for religious liberty.... [read post]
29 Nov 2019, 5:55 am by Andrew Koppelman
  I explore that possibility in my next book, forthcoming this spring from Oxford:  Gay Rights v. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 5:06 am by Bob Bauer
As the court stated repeatedly, it was adopting the same position as the district court in Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary v. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 10:16 am by Margaret Taylor
This investigation is representative of the push and pull between the legislative and executive branches as Congress exercises its oversight function and of the kinds of issues this oversight function was designed to check. [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 12:28 pm by Christopher Fonzone
Not only does the staff’s institutional location make it the best-situated executive branch actor to play the “honest broker” role, but most of the executive branch’s relevant technical expertise and capability also resides with other departments and agencies. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 11:11 am by Jeh Johnson
This is not for lack of asking by the executive branch. [read post]
  Appointed leaders serve as a necessary bridge between longstanding expertise and White House and departmental leadership. [read post]
17 Jun 2009, 5:30 am
Hydrick, 500 F.3d at 1001; see also United States v. [read post]