Search for: "NLRB v. Strong" Results 81 - 100 of 169
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jan 2016, 9:15 am by Guest Blogger
For the Symposium on the Constitution and Economic InequalityCynthia EstlundJoseph Fishkin and William Forbath, in their book-in-progress, have brilliantly exposed and mined a once-powerful, mostly-forgotten vein of constitutional political economic thought:  the notion that widely shared economic opportunity, and a broad middle class flanked by neither an underclass nor an oligarchic overclass, are essential foundations of our republican form of government. [read post]
24 Jan 2016, 12:00 pm by Guest Blogger
The Court largely endorsed that logic two terms back in Harris v. [read post]
11 Jul 2015, 2:14 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
The heavy reliance by group health plans and health insurers upon internet based applications and portals to carry out online enrollment, claims administration and payment, reporting and a host of other key health plan functions makes it particularly important for health plans, their employer or other sponsors, fiduciaries, vendors, and other involved in health plan administration or using or accessing health plan data to verify and ensure the internet data sharing and other applications and portals… [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 9:30 pm by Nicholas R. Parrillo
Indeed, many have argued that the aspiration of Brown v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 9:30 pm by Gillian E. Metzger
As Lee recounts, the chair of the NLRB argued that as an administrative agency, the NLRB was precluded from finding that the Constitution trumped the NLRA. [read post]
1 Mar 2015, 2:15 pm
Accordingly, the Court concluded that its holding in Public Adm'r of Bronx County v Equitable Life Assur. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 5:00 am
” Entry number one is of course the decision and surrounding commentary in NLRB v. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 9:30 pm by RegBlog
Two Cheers for Recess Appointments Peter Shane (Ohio State University) | June 26 As losses go, NLRB v. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:26 pm
The case is made difficult by respondents’ strong arguments that they will suffer irreparable harm because, despite a congressional finding to the contrary, marijuana does have valid therapeutic purposes. [read post]