Search for: "Jackson v. Fisher" Results 21 - 40 of 150
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 May 2018, 1:06 pm by Blake Marcus
North Carolina’s Application of U.S. v Rodriguez Case #1 State v Bedient Read More Case #4 State v Johnson Read More Case #2 State v Castillo Read More Case #5 State v Downey Read More Case… [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 2:42 pm by NARF
Haaland (Partition and Conveyances; Estate Services) Jackson v. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 6:14 pm by Daniel Harawa
ShareIn many ways, Monday’s oral argument in Dubin v. [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 1:36 pm
According to me as well as everyone who actually matters; e.g., Judges Fisher, Gould and England [the latter sitting by designation from the Eastern District of California].) [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 8:32 am by DONALD SCARINCI
The composition of the Court has changed dramatically since it last upheld the use of affirmative action in Fisher v. [read post]
12 Jul 2023, 5:09 am by SHG
Think, perhaps, of the case of Obergefell v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 4:42 am by admin
Before: REINHARDT and FISHER, Circuit Judges, and MOLLOY, District Judge.* FISHER, Circuit Judge: 1 Shawn Witte and Derrick Eason appeal the dismissal of their actions alleging severe abuse and excessive corporal punishment inflicted by educators at Variety School, a public school attended exclusively by students with disabilities, in Nevada’s Clark County School District (“District”). [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 6:37 am by Marissa Miller
Alabama and Jackson v. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 8:35 am by Jon Sands
In Jackson, the 9th allowed a jury [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 6:47 am by Will Aitchison
Fisher & Phillips believes “this is good news for employers. [read post]
4 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Two others stand out: race-based affirmative action, and state constitutional experimentation in the regulation of federal elections.On affirmative action, in Fisher v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 6:54 am by Rory Little
Richter (2011), which in turn was quoting Justice Stevens’s concurring opinion in Jackson v. [read post]