Search for: "Pacific Legal Foundation v. Brown"
Results 1 - 20
of 63
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 May 2018, 8:30 am
Up North, segregation continues to be a reality in far too many schools as well, and groups like the Pacific Legal Foundation would like to keep it that way. [read post]
11 Oct 2018, 3:09 am
Chicago; Timothy Snowball, Pacific Legal Foundation; Foodservice Equipment Reports] Plus: “The Fourth Amendment in the Digital Age,” conversation with Julian Sanchez, Matthew Feeney, and Caleb Brown for the Cato Daily Podcast. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 6:59 am
Department of Education (brought by my colleagues at Pacific Legal Foundation). [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 1:37 pm
[My wife Alison Somin, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, outlines the problem.] [read post]
20 May 2022, 9:30 pm
Brittany Hunter for the Pacific Legal Foundation on the Downton Abby law. [read post]
7 Dec 2006, 2:38 pm
This entry was written by Paul Beard, an attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento; he co-authored an amicus brief in support of the petitioners that can be found here. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 3:13 pm
Associated General Contractors of America, represented by the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation, claims that Caltrans' efforts to give at least 6.75 percent of project contracts to companies owned by women and three minority groups violate the state and federal constitutions. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 12:40 pm
Congratulations to my friends at the Pacific Legal Foundation on the victory. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 8:26 am
Thompson, staff attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 10:33 am
My post a month ago on AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 2:45 pm
Joseph Sanders (University of Houston): Milward v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 3:08 pm
  Certiorari Documents: Petition for a writ of certiorari Brief of respondents Vincent Concepcion, and Liza Concepcion in opposition Reply of petitioner AT&T Mobility LLC Supplemental brief of respondents Brief amici curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation, et al. [read post]
20 Oct 2023, 9:30 pm
George Will takes up the Pacific Legal Foundation's antiregulatory campaign to reverse Slaughter-House on the privileges and immunities clause (WaPo). [read post]
11 Oct 2016, 3:44 am
Ronald Mann previewed the case for this blog, as do Jaeeun Shin and Dara Brown for Cornell’s Legal Information Institute. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 2:14 pm
The Service failed to make a timely 12-month finding, and a complaint filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of the petitioners on November 20, 2015 sought to compel the Service to make a 12-month finding on the vireo. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 2:36 pm
Both Connerly and ACRI were permitted by the district court to intervene in the present case and were represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative/libertarian public interest litigation firm that has successfully represented proponents of Section 31 in other cases, including Coral Constr, Inc v City & County of San Francisco (CalSCt (2010); 93 EPD ¶43,961) and Hi-Voltage Wire Works, Inc v City of San Jose (CalSCt (2000); 76 EPD… [read post]
24 Mar 2016, 9:13 am
Additional coverage comes from Asher Steinberg at The Narrowest Grounds, Alan Morrison at The George Washington Law Review, Andrew Pincus at Mayer Brown’s Class Defense Blog, Tim Bishop and Chad Clamage at Mayer Brown’s Class Defense Blog, Deborah LaFetra at Pacific Legal Foundation’s Liberty Blog, and Sharon Rosenberg at Thompson Coburn LLP. [read post]
16 May 2016, 2:13 pm
Early commentary comes from Deborah LaFetra at the Pacific Legal Foundation’s Liberty Blog, Andrew Pincus, Archis Parasharami, and John Nadolenco at Mayer Brown’s Class Defense Blog, and Adam Klein at Lawfare. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 11:52 am
Coleman served as co-counsel with Thurgood Marshall in Brown v. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 3:55 pm
The CEQA suit filed by the property rights-oriented Pacific Legal Foundation challenges the accuracy of the SCS’s “baseline” assumptions about GHG emissions, claiming they fail to account for new vehicle emissions reductions and thus overstate both the impacts of the “no action” alternative and the quantum of reductions actually needed for the SCS to meet SB 375’s targets. [read post]
