Search for: "NATIONS v. STONE" Results 101 - 120 of 957
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Stone–continued to accept or at least acquiesce in most of the Court’s decisions, but after 1925 they also wrote many of their most trenchant and eventually influential dissents and concurrences. [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 12:26 pm
  There are also assorted reports of use of the Stone, Seidman, et al. book from Aspen, but those appear to be it. [read post]
29 Mar 2019, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
  Professor Tsai draws upon his research at the National Archives to discuss why Justice Jackson should have resisted Chief Justice Stone’s request that “he delete certain passages from his original draft opinion” in West Virginia v. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
  Sean Wilentz, in Rolling Stone (via HNN) on Why We Must Impeach. [read post]
17 Feb 2019, 2:30 pm by David Lat
[Institute for Justice] * Should Roger Stone be gagged? [read post]
10 Nov 2019, 4:00 am by INFORRM
The test to be applied to national security cases is, as Stone points out, the Pentagon Papers version of the clear and present danger test (per Stewart “direct, immediate and irreparable damage to our Nation or its people”). [read post]
8 Nov 2019, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
National/Federal A Conspiracy of Hunches: Roger Stone trial set to start this week San Francisco Chronicle – Devlin Barrett, Spencer Hsu, and Manuel Roig-Franzia (Washington Post) | Published: 11/4/2019 Roger Stone is on trial in federal court, where prosecutors plan to dive back into an episode of political chicanery, alleged lies, and conspiratorial texts that parallels the nascent impeachment inquiry into his longtime friend President Trump. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 10:50 am by David Kris
We met also with advisors to the Israeli National Security Council, a justice of the Israeli Supreme Court, and noted experts in international law. [read post]
30 Mar 2014, 7:00 am by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 39636 (ED VA, March 20, 2014), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Moorish American Moslem inmate that he was denied a vegetarian diet, and that in court proceedings, the judge told him to remove his "religious national headdress," did not use his "free national name," and called him "black"instead of Moor.In Plummer v. [read post]