Search for: "North Dakota v. United States" Results 81 - 100 of 527
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jul 2015, 6:22 pm by DSVlaw Blog
Ohio); North Dakota, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Wyoming, the New Mexico Environmental Department and New Mexico State Engineer in States of North [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 10:12 am
Under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Quill Corp. v. [read post]
10 Sep 2020, 12:00 pm by Unknown
United States (FTCA)Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma & Yuima Reservation v. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 3:22 pm by Ilya Shapiro
North Dakota is out of step with modern commerce clause precedents. [read post]
1 Feb 2018, 11:27 am by Anthony B. Cavender
District Court for North Dakota on August 27, 2015 for the 13 states challenging the rule in that court, and then by a nationwide stay by the U.S. [read post]
30 Jun 2016, 9:01 pm by John Dean
The State of Texas, joined by 25 others states, filed a lawsuit to block this executive action, which affects between 4 and 5 million immigrants in the United States. [read post]
21 Mar 2019, 11:29 am by James E. Novak, P.L.L.C.
The issue of implied consent has been a hot topic in courts across the United States since the Supreme Court decided Birchfield v. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 9:05 am by John P. Ahlers
United States involved the construction of a marina in a state park near a small town in North Dakota.  [read post]
11 Jan 2019, 1:28 pm by Kent Scheidegger
North Dakota on the issue of warrant requirements for tests of apparently intoxicated drivers. [read post]
5 Aug 2020, 3:31 pm by Unknown
United States (Sovereign Immunity)State Courts Bulletinhttps://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2020.htmlIn the Matter of the Adoption of B.B. [read post]
24 Mar 2021, 5:48 am by boston
Americans United is opposing threats to separation of church and state in state legislatures nationwide. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 5:12 am by Kevin Kaufman
Such a statute could read: No state or locality may rely upon the new constitutional standard for substantial nexus articulated by the United States Supreme Court in South Dakota v. [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 9:14 pm by Jeff Schmitt
(Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin). [read post]