Search for: "In re Application of Burwell" Results 1 - 20 of 74
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Nov 2014, 7:51 am by Patrick Wyrick
Burwell presents a straightforward question of statutory interpretation, the sort judges decide routinely and readily​. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 9:30 am by Edward A. Fallone
Had Congress meant to limit tax credits to State Exchanges, it likely would have done so in the definition of “applicable taxpayer” or in some other prominent manner. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 10:11 am by Native American Rights Fund
(Indian Child Welfare Act, application of)In re McCarrick/Lamoreaux (Indian Child Welfare Act, Michigan Indian Family Preservation Act)In the matter of L.M. [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 3:49 am by Amy Howe
Burwell, it will “have a great deal of explaining to do — not to me, but to history. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 5:23 am by Amy Howe
At Re’s Judicata, Richard Re looks at how “three apparently unrelated cases . . . implicate the Supreme Court’s ability to send non-precedential signals to lower courts. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 1:14 pm
Burwell, President Obama expressed his “frustration” that a lower court has blocked implementation of his immigration reforms. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 9:01 pm by Marci A. Hamilton
Of course, that is not what happened as a narrowly divided Supreme Court in Burwell v. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 6:02 am
 As Grewal explains, The Preamble to the regulation cites no statutory authority for re-writing Section 36B. [read post]
29 Jun 2014, 7:02 pm
Burwell -  Conestoga: Whether the religious owners of a family business, or their closely held, for-profit corporation, have free exercise rights that are violated by the application of the contraceptive-coverage mandate of the Affordable Care Act. [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 5:46 am by Amy Howe
At Re’s Judicata, Richard Re examines the Court’s treatment, in Burwell v. [read post]
10 Mar 2015, 3:49 am by Amy Howe
Burwell, returning the Catholic university’s challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s birth-control mandate to the lower courts after last Term’s decision in Burwell v. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 8:57 am by John Elwood
The Court also re-listed for a second time in Nichols v. [read post]