Search for: "Doe v. Rumsfeld, et al."
Results 21 - 40
of 45
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued October 16, 2012 Decided January 22, 2013 No. 11-1265 AMERICANS FOR SAFE ACCESS, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 11:43 am
Rumsfeld, et al., docket 11-1277; a post discussing that appeal is here). [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 2:08 pm
Rumsfeld, et al.) [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 5:41 am
Rumsfeld. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 5:41 am
Al-Nashiri’s case, one sees that the government does not offer the William Murphy precedent and other conspiracy military commissions in this way. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 6:34 am
Al-Odah v. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 12:40 am
Doe v. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 6:45 am
Rumsfeld, the conflict with al Qaeda et al. is a non-international armed conflict. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 9:27 am
Moreover, Padilla’s claims against Rumsfeld et al. may fall on more sympathetic ears in the Fourth Circuit, which narrowly divided on the legality of domestic military detention in the al-Marri litigation and issued a blistering rebuke to government for its handling of Padilla’s habeas case. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 3:58 pm
Supreme Court in Hamdan v. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 7:08 am
The Court's denial of review of Rasul, et al., v. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 8:36 pm
The filing came in the case of Rasul, et al., v. [read post]
21 Mar 2009, 4:21 am
Rumsfeld in 2004, and Hamdan v. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 1:52 pm
Both new briefs were filed in Rasul, et al., v. [read post]
19 Nov 2008, 7:42 pm
Courthouse Habashi, et al., v. [read post]
22 Aug 2008, 9:29 pm
(The petition in Rasul, et al., v. [read post]
12 Apr 2008, 5:32 am
[N]o argument about what he did or didn't facilitate, or about his special obligations as an attorney, makes his conduct morally equivalent to that of his nominal clients, Secretary Rumsfeld, et al., or comparable to the conduct of interrogators distant in time, rank and place. [read post]
13 Jan 2008, 6:36 am
The President does (Nixon v. [read post]
11 Jan 2008, 7:54 am
Both of the rulings — Rasul, et al., v. [read post]
21 Sep 2007, 11:08 am
Our latest effort to feature interesting cert. petitions pending at the Supreme Court is Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany, et al. v. [read post]
