Search for: "Miller v. United States"
Results 541 - 560
of 2,353
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2019, 11:58 am
Aurelius Investment, United States v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm
Section One straightforwardly provides: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Moving beyond the bare text, it is important, even (maybe especially) a hundred years later, to think more about what the Amendment really sought to constitutionally accomplish, and how its full import has not been deeply understood. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 1:38 pm
Miller v. [read post]
24 Jun 2019, 3:55 am
United States, the court held 7-2 that to convict a defendant in U.S. illegally for violating a federal gun-possession law, prosecutors must show that defendant knew he was in the country illegally. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm
This defense comes from a United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit case (also, confusingly enough, named City of New York v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 2:49 pm
See also, Miller v. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 7:26 am
Supreme Court in Miller v. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 9:48 am
State v. [read post]
30 May 2019, 1:09 pm
Comm’r,489 F.3d 1018, 1023 (9th Cir. 2007); United States v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 5:36 am
United States, 16-1344, declining to weigh in on the scope of unauthorized access under the CFAA. [read post]
20 May 2019, 9:11 am
Merely stating the seemingly obvious--that the unit of analysis is “the case”--does not solve all problems. [read post]
16 May 2019, 7:55 am
United States, 18-7096. [read post]
13 May 2019, 3:15 pm
State v. [read post]
12 May 2019, 9:01 pm
United States case) is a bit more complicated than might appear at first blush.Let’s start with a simple part: to the extent that the president was asserting that he could seek review of any impeachment proceedings directly in the Supreme Court before any lower court had looked at the matter, his assertion would run smack dab into the most venerable of Supreme Court rulings, the 1803 case of Marbury v. [read post]
6 May 2019, 12:05 pm
United States, 18-6859, and Santos v. [read post]
5 May 2019, 8:18 am
From 1968 to 1971, he served in the United States Army, including a tour in Vietnam. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 4:48 am
In the intervening years, the Supreme Court has issued some good opinions, such as United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 12:10 pm
IMS Health, Citizens United), and of course Muslims against racist policies (Trump v. [read post]
25 Apr 2019, 11:23 am
Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 9:01 pm
Drawing on and quoting from Printz v. [read post]
