Search for: "Free v. State" Results 41 - 60 of 39,314
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 May 2024, 7:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
  “[L]ocal school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained [there]in …” (Board of Ed., Island Trees Union Free School Dist. [read post]
9 May 2024, 7:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
  “[L]ocal school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained [there]in …” (Board of Ed., Island Trees Union Free School Dist. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 [*2]The City actors are the Mayor of the City of New York, the New York City Department of Education, and its Chancellor (collectively the City).Plaintiffs challenge State and City policies that plaintiffs claim deny Black and Latinx [FN3] students their state constitutional right to a "sound basic education" under article XI § 1 (Board of Educ., Levittown Union Free School Dist. v Nyquist, 57 NY2d 27, 48 [1982], appeal… [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 [*2]The City actors are the Mayor of the City of New York, the New York City Department of Education, and its Chancellor (collectively the City).Plaintiffs challenge State and City policies that plaintiffs claim deny Black and Latinx [FN3] students their state constitutional right to a "sound basic education" under article XI § 1 (Board of Educ., Levittown Union Free School Dist. v Nyquist, 57 NY2d 27, 48 [1982], appeal… [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm by Evan Brown
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm by Evan Brown
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:31 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
This is recognized in the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) at 9 FAM § 402.1-3 , which states that an “applicant desiring to come to the United States for one principal purpose, and one or more incidental purposes, must be classified in accordance with the principal purpose. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:43 am by centerforartlaw
Source: USPTO  Rothschild moved to dismiss the complaint under the Second Circuit’s Rogers v. [read post]