Search for: "People v Hamdy" Results 1 - 20 of 92
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Nov 2006, 3:00 am
You can listen to tapes of his oral argument in Hamdi v. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 12:05 am
In an article in yesterday's New York Times, Jonathan Mahler discusses how unusual it is for the Supreme Court to uphold a challenge to a president's wartime powers, as the Court did recently in Hamdi v. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 6:19 pm by Gerard N. Magliocca
Two of the dissenters in Hamdi v. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 9:07 pm
District Court focused mainly on what Congress meant nearly eight years ago in its first response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and on what the Supreme Court meant in 2004 in  its first ruling in a  modern detention case (Hamdi v. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 2:41 pm by Adam Klein
In the absence of a landmark national-security-related majority opinion, I will highlight a dissent: specifically, the Justice’s dissent in Hamdi v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 8:57 pm
But in both Boumediene and today in Kennedy v. [read post]
3 Apr 2007, 1:35 am
You may have noticed that one of the key issues in yesterday's global warming decision, Massachusetts v. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 11:00 am by James E. Pfander
Tyler concludes with a closely reasoned and historically inflected assessment of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Hamdi v. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:24 pm by Stephen Bilkis
As noted in People v Paul, whether a foundation for the experience and training is set forth or not, it seems that, as a matter of fundamental fairness, defendant should not have to proceed to trial in a narcotics case unless and until a laboratory report has been filed by the People. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 11:57 am by Robert Chesney
  This seems clearly correct as a matter of John Doe's Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause rights, in accordance with 2004's Hamdi v. [read post]
27 Nov 2006, 3:38 am
Remember that the Military Commissions Act primarily affects non-citzens held overseas, and if anything is clear from Scalia's concurrence in Hamdi v. [read post]