Search for: "CHOICES INSTITUTE v. OKLAHOMA HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY"
Results 1 - 16
of 16
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Mar 2012, 9:03 pm
(NOTE: This blog provides a full array of background materials on the health care case, at this site.) [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 8:51 am
V. [read post]
13 Mar 2017, 8:48 am
Ninth Circuit: If the Supreme Court can call a health-care exchange established by the federal government “an exchange established by [a] State,” see King v. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 12:30 pm
The consolidated cases are Sebelius v. [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 7:01 am
Privacy Concerns and Stigma The DACOWITS focus groups conducted on pregnancy, postpartum reintegration, and child care issues highlight women’s concerns about privacy and their health care choices. [read post]
6 Aug 2014, 9:01 pm
Hobby Lobby, arguing state informed consent restrictions on abortion—which can include misleading health information in addition to advocating for the woman to make any other choice—violate its religious beliefs. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 1:04 pm
Philadelphia, PA Executive Office, American Law Institute, 2009. [read post]
10 Sep 2021, 12:27 pm
" For example, Oklahoma v. [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 9:05 pm
Rosenthal and Johns argued that the Office should track the health impacts of climate change, disseminate information on the connections between climate change and health, and monitor the health care industry’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 9:05 pm
In West Virginia v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:27 pm
See Boulder Rev.Code § 12-1-1 (defining “sexual orientation” as “the choice of sexual partners, i.e., bisexual, homosexual or heterosexual”); Denver Rev. [read post]
16 Feb 2021, 8:17 am
This overview is a building block for further debates about the necessity of a domestic terrorism statute and the policy choices facing the Biden administration. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 6:25 am
Dukes and AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 2:28 pm
In fact, as was set forth in the OCA's answer to the petition, the health insurance cause of action must be dismissed for failure to join a necessary party because the real party in interest is the president of the Civil Service Commission, who negotiates health insurance packages on behalf of the Judiciary. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 8:17 am
The Legislative Budget Board, however, proposed a number of additions to this cost, to better take into account the costs of complying with Ruiz v. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 9:24 am
Click Here DECISIONS Arkema, Inc. v. [read post]
