Search for: "Hunt v. United States" Results 121 - 140 of 781
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jan 2019, 10:37 am by David Kopel
No jurisdiction in the United States has a law like New York City's. [read post]
19 Jan 2019, 2:49 am
Among the significant opinions he authored was United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 1:05 pm by John K. Ross
Man makes false statement on mortgage application, application for hunting license. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 10:08 am by Guest Blogger
  In response, the State of Wyoming argued—as it had successfully below—that the dispute was squarely governed by the Court’s decision in Ward v. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 5:03 am by Eugene Volokh
There are, though, some exception to the nonimmigrant alien possession ban, in subsection (y)(2) of the statute; they are chiefly for certain foreign officials, for aliens "admitted to the United States for lawful hunting or sporting purposes," or for aliens who are "in possession of a hunting license or permit lawfully issued in the United States. [read post]
10 Jan 2019, 10:00 pm by DONALD SCARINCI
The justices will specifically determine “whether Wyoming’s admission to the Union or the establishment of the Bighorn National Forest abrogated the Crow Tribe of Indians’ 1868 federal treaty right to hunt on the ‘unoccupied lands of the United States,’ thereby permitting the present-day criminal conviction of a Crow member who engaged in subsistence hunting for his family. [read post]
8 Jan 2019, 3:57 am by Edith Roberts
” At Crime & Consequences, Kent Scheidegger writes that United States v. [read post]
2 Jan 2019, 11:18 am by Gregory Ablavsky
In this case, the validity of Herrera’s state-law conviction turns on the continued force of the 1868 Second Treaty of Fort Laramie between the Crow Tribe and the United States, which guaranteed the tribe “the right to hunt on the unoccupied lands of the United States so long as game may be found thereon. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 4:00 am by Administrator
This excerpt chronicles Donald’s journey to defend Mi’kmaw treaty rights in the Supreme Court of Canada and sets the stage for understanding the impacts of R. v. [read post]