Search for: "People v. Downing"
Results 241 - 260
of 16,738
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Dec 2024, 7:57 am
” In fact, one could easily argue that TikTok itself implements all three of the Three Warfares in the warfighting doctrine of the People’s Liberation Army—and Bytedance v. [read post]
9 Dec 2024, 6:30 am
Consequently, in Meta v. [read post]
9 Dec 2024, 5:23 am
Ala.) in Prattville Pride v. [read post]
9 Dec 2024, 3:57 am
” After the Supreme Court handed down New York Times v. [read post]
9 Dec 2024, 1:25 am
Also on 5 December 2024, judgment was handed down by Linden J dismissing the appeal Smith v Poulton & Ors [2024] EWHC 3115 (KB). [read post]
8 Dec 2024, 6:48 am
In the representative case of Pfeffer v. [read post]
8 Dec 2024, 12:58 am
Her motion was unopposed, and the Bill was set down for second reading on Friday 7 March. [read post]
6 Dec 2024, 2:17 pm
And arguably the US government routinely engages in influence operations–maybe covert, maybe not–against the American people too. [read post]
6 Dec 2024, 11:20 am
UN Human Rights CommitteeCacho v. [read post]
6 Dec 2024, 7:33 am
Circuit just held in TikTok v. [read post]
6 Dec 2024, 7:00 am
Clients appreciate his transparency; as Deborah V. noted, “Mike gave us [read post]
5 Dec 2024, 9:00 pm
In Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. [read post]
5 Dec 2024, 8:02 am
Virginia, which struck down bans on interracial marriage. [read post]
5 Dec 2024, 5:59 am
Those familiar with the caselaw in this area will know that the Supreme Court held in Holder v. [read post]
4 Dec 2024, 2:50 pm
No one knows what would have happened if the governments had sat down to negotiate. [read post]
4 Dec 2024, 1:06 pm
Virginia, the Supreme Court’s 1967 case striking down Virginia’s ban on interracial marriage. [read post]
4 Dec 2024, 6:30 am
” This is a critically important set of observations, because it helps turn upside down the longstanding effort by to trivialize privacy injuries as speculative. [read post]
3 Dec 2024, 5:31 am
Accordingly, any military action that relies solely on these “inherent” powers should be deemed to violate the Posse Comitatus Act, and should be sustained only if it falls within the president’s “conclusive and preclusive” sphere of authority (per Justice Robert Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2024, 6:16 am
’” In making that finding, Mehta had quoted the Supreme Court’s strict test for incitement in the landmark case of Brandenberg v. [read post]
