Search for: "JANE DOE, a minor in and for her own behalf and in her own right"
Results 1 - 20
of 35
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Nov 2019, 2:31 pm
We first filed the case in October 2017 on behalf of Jane Doe, a fearless young immigrant woman who fought the Trump administration’s attempt to deny her right to end her pregnancy. [read post]
30 Sep 2020, 8:30 am
Doe’s express wishes, and despite the fact that she had already obtained a court order permitting her to proceed with her abortion without involving her parents.We rushed into court on behalf of Ms. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 9:45 am
For reasons that are not clear to us, they suddenly decided to release Jane Roe on her own recognizance and dismiss the appeals. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 11:03 am
How did (does) her Judaism figure into Ginsburg’s life? [read post]
23 Sep 2020, 12:09 pm
After learning of that anti-abortion policy, we sued on behalf of Jane Doe, a then 17-year-old Central American immigrant. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 4:47 am
Garza, the case involving HHS’s efforts to deny a 17-year-old girl in its custody—"Jane Doe"—the right to obtain an abortion to which she was entitled under the Constitution and Texas law. [read post]
6 Dec 2018, 9:40 am
In July 2008, Edwards and I filed the lawsuit on behalf of two women whom the Justice Department has identified as having been sexually assasulted by Epstein when they were underage -- Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 7:45 am
We’ve already gone to court on behalf of Jane Doe, Jane Poe, Jane Roe, and Jane Moe, so that they could get the abortions they wanted, but we know that there are more Janes out there. [read post]
26 Dec 2017, 8:16 am
In this case, the revelation would be particularly damaging – it might have made it impossible for her to get the abortion she wanted, and that was her constitutional right. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 3:16 pm
Efforts by an alleged perpetrator and his legal team to unmask a Jane Doe plaintiff (by revealing her name) were held dead on arrival by the Illinois Appellate Court today. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 9:01 pm
Jane Doe clearly has a right under relevant Supreme Court precedents to terminate her pregnancy. [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 10:36 am
” As we now know, that understanding of the government’s view was not correct: ORR asserts that it does indeed have the authority, which it has exercised, to block such a minor from obtaining an abortion, even when (as in the Jane Poe case) there was no prospect of transferring her to a sponsor in the few days remaining before her abortion would be prohibited by state law. [read post]
19 Dec 2017, 4:39 am
(Those precedents make clear, though, that a pregnant woman has a right to abortion by her own choice up to the point where the fetus is capable of living outside the womb, if delivered. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 8:58 am
Jane Doe’s lawyers also argue against any disciplinary action for the way they have defended the rights they believe Jane Doe has. [read post]
21 Sep 2016, 5:28 pm
The original author’s opportunity to vindicate her rights does not justify denying the web site operator an opportunity to vindicate its own independent First Amendment rights. [read post]
19 Aug 2016, 1:02 pm
The original author’s opportunity to vindicate her rights does not justify denying the web site operator an opportunity to vindicate its own independent First Amendment rights. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 2:25 pm
In it, Estelle (portrayed, right, in a pose that is temptlingly captionable) confesses that her interest was cultivated by a student lecture that mentioned patents, and then by her enjoyment at having to research an IP essay. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 5:14 am
The Government was well aware of Jane Doe #3 when it was negotiating the NPA, as it listed her as a victim in the attachment to the NPA. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 4:35 am
While Jane Doe #3 has her own lawyers, Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell, more than ready to do her bidding, these two couldn’t bear the Dersh’s “public and aggressive victim-blaming,” and so they felt compelled to call him out. [read post]
2 Feb 2023, 9:37 pm
But the appointment does not require members to divest their own personal biotech investments. [read post]
