Search for: "Howard et al. v. United States" Results 21 - 40 of 138
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 May 2007, 3:28 pm
Quranic Literacy Institute, et al. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 12:36 pm
United States Issue: Whether the holding in Roe v. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 7:28 am by Allison Trzop
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County v. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 5:38 am by Ben
Sirius XM Radio Inc., et al in the United States District Court, Central District of California [read post]
11 Nov 2010, 8:17 am by Amanda Rice
Massey Coal Company, Inc., et al., the Court’s 2009 judicial recusal case. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 8:08 am by Allison Trzop
Briefly: At PrawfsBlawg, Will Baude covers United States v. [read post]
18 Oct 2020, 5:24 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
The parties brought a motion seeking an injunction on July 3, 2020, in Sanctuary et al v. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 6:00 am by Kevin Kaufman
Pappas et al. (2007) find that counterfeit cigarettes can have as much as seven times the lead of authentic brands, and close to three times as much thallium, a toxic heavy metal.[13] Other sources report finding insect eggs, dead flies, mold, and human feces in counterfeit cigarettes.[14] During prohibition of alcohol in the United States during the 1920s, increased enforcement did not manage to significantly decrease the prevalence of bootlegging because the… [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 2:55 am by Kevin Kaufman
Pappas et al. find that counterfeit cigarettes can have as much as seven times the lead of authentic brands, and close to three times as much thallium, a toxic heavy metal.[14] Other sources report finding insect eggs, dead flies, mold, and human feces in counterfeit cigarettes.[15] During prohibition of alcohol in the United States during the 1920s, increased enforcement did not manage to significantly decrease the prevalence of bootlegging because the… [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 5:55 am by Barbara Bavis
  Further, the United States Supreme Court recently heard arguments in Vance v. [read post]