Search for: "Georgia v. United States" Results 61 - 80 of 3,080
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Dec 2019, 3:59 pm by Michel-Adrien
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States heard the case Georgia, et al. v. [read post]
27 Jan 2012, 8:06 am
In Georgia and throughout the United States, governments have "sovereign immunity" for what they do. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 10:44 am by Hannah Holmes
CLAYTON COUNTY, GEORGIA    In a 6-3 decision written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the Supreme Court of the United States extended the protections of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect employees discriminated against based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. [read post]
29 Jun 2020, 10:54 am by Michael DelSignore
  In a 6-3 opinion written by notoriously conservative Justice Gorsuch, the United States Supreme Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in Bostock v. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 7:59 am by christopher
(Yes, I know this is Cambridge United logo and not Cambridge Press.) [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 11:40 am by Hill & Bleiberg
Slip, trip and falls are the number one cause of accidental injuries in the United States. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 12:40 pm
Slip, trip and falls are the number one cause of accidental injuries in the United States. [read post]
23 Apr 2021, 4:15 am by Roya Ghafele
These methods have come to be seen as compatible with the Georgia Pacific Criteria, which set out the core valuation principles in the United States and, increasingly so, even beyond U.S. borders. [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 12:37 pm by Bernard Bell
United States Citizenship & Immigration Services. 407 F.Supp.3d 311 (D.D.C. 2019); Knight First Amendment Institute v. [read post]
5 Feb 2021, 10:51 am by Pam Brannon
Georgia attorneys including future United States District Judge Horace T. [read post]
1 Dec 2006, 9:44 am
Because of its mistaken identification of disclosure as conduct, the court then applied United States v. [read post]