Search for: "Hodges v. United States"
Results 361 - 380
of 674
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2019, 8:15 am
Moreover, in Burke v United Kingdom (App No.19807/0) 11 July 2006, the argument that there was insufficient protection of art 2 rights because a doctor might decide to withdraw CANH without being under an obligation to obtain the approval of the court was expressly rejected. [read post]
25 May 2017, 4:10 am
Hodges doesn’t require the state to list both married same-sex parents on their child’s birth certificate,” although “[s]tate law requires that both married opposite-sex parents be listed. [read post]
1 Nov 2018, 4:22 pm
USA LLC, et al. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2023, 10:26 pm
Texas was decided on June 26, 2003; United States v. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 4:21 pm
Douglas, in Doe V. [read post]
27 Dec 2015, 10:45 am
One has to wonder whether the party arguing in favor of the existence of a cohabitation agreement in that case would have tried to make such a stretch after the United States Supreme Court ruling of Obergefell v. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 2:00 am
On June 26, 2015 the Supreme Court of the United States, in Obergefell v. [read post]
7 May 2020, 1:06 pm
" United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 9:03 pm
Hodges, which protects the right to same-sex marriage. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 4:00 am
In South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. [read post]
4 Feb 2017, 5:33 am
Federal Republic of Ethiopia that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act gives state-sponsored hackers immunity, while Emma Kohse discussed the history and current state of the ATS suit Salim v. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 12:51 pm
Hodges decision this past June, there has been very little discussion of what happens to civil unions and those who are united in civil unions. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 12:51 pm
Hodges decision this past June, there has been very little discussion of what happens to civil unions and those who are united in civil unions. [read post]
21 Apr 2020, 5:00 am
" Kimble v. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am
However in so far as they seek to declare it “null” and of “no effect” he submits that they went too far and where they cannot go. 14:16: Lord Keen QC notes that this principle is consistent with extensive authority and which Sir James Eadie QC will address in due course in further detail. 14:14: Lord Keen QC notes that the Inner House accepted that the principle of non-justiciability exists in public law and that the question of whether something is… [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 10:47 am
G.G., immigration regulation in United States v. [read post]
4 May 2022, 4:00 am
It then also notes that the plaintiffs and the United States as amicus had connected the abortion right to the right of consenting adults to engage in same-sex sexual conduct (recognized in Lawrence v. [read post]
27 Oct 2021, 7:51 am
The case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
24 Sep 2020, 1:20 pm
” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made this declaration in her majority opinion in United States v. [read post]