Search for: "Minor v. State"
Results 181 - 200
of 16,184
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Feb 2024, 1:28 pm
Past cases, such as Kamen v. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 1:19 pm
From Doe v. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 12:51 pm
The case, LePage v. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
Tornetta et al. v. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
Tornetta et al. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
In short, the court concluded in LePage v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 7:23 pm
In Doe v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 6:07 pm
Williams v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 12:36 pm
. [* * *] California Restriction on Gun Ads That "Reasonably Appear[] to Be Attractive to Minors" Likely Unconstitutional From Junior Sports Magazines, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 3:07 pm
Alabama’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act does not define a “child” but in Mack v. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 4:05 am
In LePage v. [read post]
SCOTUS Repeated Relisting of a Case on the Meaning of Race Neutrality--and a Plug for my new Article
19 Feb 2024, 4:00 am
If a state adopted a facially race-neutral law or policy with the purpose and effect of disadvantaging members of a racial minority group, that would be presumptively invalid; the Court's cases say that the same strict scrutiny applies to all racial classifications; hence, one might think that percentage plans and other facially race-neutral efforts are vulnerable to legal challenge.The issue is hardly theoretical. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 1:45 am
On 14 February 2024 there was a strike out/summary judgment application in the case of Chowdhury-v-Secretary of State for the Home Department KB-2023-003368. [read post]
17 Feb 2024, 11:07 am
Reich v. [read post]
17 Feb 2024, 7:54 am
” Lutkauskas v. [read post]
17 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
The purpose of law was to allow majorities to prevail over minorities, and the purpose of courts was to allow the dominant group to express its views through legislation. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 5:44 pm
The thesis of “governing as a minority” is heard in the highest spheres. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 12:00 pm
(One has to consider whether these would pass First Amendment scrutiny, particularly in light of recent decisions such as the one in NetChoice v. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 11:27 am
Trevino v. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 9:39 am
Exclusionary zoning is permitted under Euclid v. [read post]