Search for: "Harper v. No Named Respondent"
Results 61 - 74
of 74
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Apr 2021, 9:52 am
Google LLC v. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 6:04 am
R. v. [read post]
30 May 2023, 11:19 am
Ontario (“Working Families I”) and Working Families Coalition (Canada) Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2010, 2:11 am
While in most cases it will be a media defendant who wishes to rely on the defence, there is Privy Council authority to the effect that the privilege can be asserted by a non-media defendant (Seaga v Harper [2008] UKPC 9). [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 4:00 am
The Court declined the invitation to apply heightened scrutiny, instead agreeing with respondents that none was needed. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 9:36 am
Akhil Amar whether he was inclined to respond to Prof. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 2:08 pm
And we all know that, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in Schenk v. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 11:14 am
Here's our Summary of Argument: Beauty pageants, true to their name, are "theatrical production[s]"[1] that aim to convey a particular viewpoint about beauty, femininity, or identity. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 3:04 am
” He refused to adopt the name, and attempts to hold on to his African identity. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 8:57 am
Much of the evidence I discuss here has been ignored or overlooked in the existing scholarship on Section Three, and most of it does not appear in any of the briefs in Trump v. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 5:00 am
” As expected, the proposal immediately came under fire by anti-copyright activist Michael Geist.[1] In criticizing the proposal he deployed the playbook that he uses to systematically oppose initiatives to protect creators of cultural materials;[2] namely, to deny there is any problem to be addressed, contend that even if there is problem the laws don’t need changing, and to engage in scaremongering[3], in this case, by claiming the proposal is “radical” and… [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 4:00 am
Are law societies promoting apps because of a mistaken belief that they can end the problem, or merely to enhance the appearance of law societies’ adequately responding to the problem? [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 11:21 pm
R. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 10:23 am
Part V addresses Miller and Tucker's claim that the American Founders were unfamiliar with dramatic technological changes in firearms — a claim that is refuted by Dupuy's data. [read post]
