Search for: "Flast v. Cohen"
Results 1 - 20
of 65
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Apr 2011, 7:22 am
Cohen. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 10:02 am
Respondents’ suit does not fall within the narrow exception to the rule against taxpayer standing established in Flast v. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 4:22 am
Cohen. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 9:37 am
Cohen (1968), to look beyond the question of aid to religion. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 9:26 am
Cohen precedent. [read post]
27 Jun 2007, 3:15 pm
FEC) and continued gutting an older one (Flast v. [read post]
14 Oct 2008, 5:18 pm
The issue is whether the plaintiff-taxpayers have standing under Flast v. [read post]
28 Feb 2007, 12:27 pm
Clement at the podium, was it even intimated that the Court should consider throwing out entirely the four-decades-old precedent in Flast v. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 6:26 pm
In 1968, the Court ruled 8-1 in Flast v. [read post]
26 Jun 2007, 4:37 am
The Court narrowly read Flast v. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 11:06 am
... [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 5:44 pm
In Winn, a divided court ruled that taxpayers lack standing to challenge this and other tax credit programs—thereby dramatically limiting the Flast v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 2:41 pm
Cohen applies, saying:In their view the tax credit is, for Flast purposes, best understood as a governmental expenditure. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 11:02 pm
While the matter directly at hand is the scope of taxpayer standing first permitted in Flast v. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 6:32 am
If the President, for example, placed a permanent cross in the White House without using funds earmarked by Congress, it is unlikely anyone would have standing to challenge that decision Hein also reaffirms the seminal taxpayer standing case, Flast v. [read post]
24 May 2011, 9:36 pm
” Writing for a five-Justice majority, Justice Kennedy held that Flast v. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 5:20 pm
Citing the Supreme Court's 1968 decision in Flast v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 8:32 am
” Implicitly rejecting intangible, wisdely-shared, “psychic” harms as a basis for standing, the Winn majority held that though taxpayers might have standing to contest legislative appropriations designed to aid religious enterprises as in Flast v. [read post]
27 Sep 2011, 10:30 am
” Green notes that in its 1968 Flast v. [read post]
