Search for: "Harris v. District of Columbia"
Results 181 - 200
of 331
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2011, 2:00 am
Harris, 741 S.W.2d 334, 335-36 (Tenn. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
Sterling Drug, Inc., 416 F.2d 417, 426 (2d Cir. 1969).District of Columbia: McNeil Pharmaceutical v. [read post]
19 Feb 2007, 12:54 pm
For example, a couple who are District of Columbia domestic partners would be treated as domestic partners in New Jersey, as would be French same-sex partners who have a civil solidarity pact, or registered partners from other European countries whose status falls short of the full panoply of marriage rights. [read post]
21 Jun 2024, 1:00 pm
Last time we encountered an ongoing challenge to a new CFPB-credit-card rule a Fifth Circuit panel mandamized the district court because it lacked jurisdiction to transfer the case to the District of Columbia. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 1:34 pm
The second case today, Mount Lemmon Fire District v. [read post]
22 Feb 2021, 1:00 pm
In 2008, a divided Supreme Court, in District of Columbia v. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
” Moreover, the earlier ban was imposed in 1994 — before the Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 11:48 am
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 11:05 am
Harris v. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 9:20 am
Harris (decided, May 22, 2017) State legislatures may not move more black voters into an election district to give them a majority if they already make alliances with white voters that allow them to get their preferred candidates elected, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 5:33 am
Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 5:35 am
The Supreme Court upheld the Hyde Amendment in Harris v. [read post]
17 Jun 2023, 1:37 am
Harris v. [read post]
18 Oct 2013, 1:01 pm
Licenses will be available on Monday, making New Jersey the 14th state, along with the District of Columbia, to allow such marriages — provided the new order is only a prelude to a formal equality ruling. [read post]
30 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
When last I wrote on this website about the plan, around two years ago, elected legislatures in eight states (Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Washington, Vermont and California) and the District of Columbia—comprising 132 electoral college votes altogether (almost half the needed 270 votes)—had adopted the idea. [read post]
13 May 2025, 7:03 am
New Jersey, filed in Massachusetts by a group of 18 states, the District of Columbia, and San Francisco. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
To date, the legislatures of ten states and the District of Columbia—which collectively account for 165 electoral college votes, well more than half of the 270 needed for the NPV bill to become effective—have passed laws to adopt the measure. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 6:02 am
District Court for the District of Columbia is ruling on the U.S. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 1:30 pm
District of Columbia, 478 F.3d 370 (2007) (see denial of rehearing en banc). [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 4:37 am
In Brady v. [read post]
