Search for: "People v. Gonzales" Results 161 - 180 of 541
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jan 2015, 6:39 am
RFRA and RLUIPA have been applied by the Supreme Court three times, once allowing a religious exemption along conservative-liberal lines (Hobby Lobby), and twice allowing it unanimously (Gonzales v. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 4:20 pm
City of Hialeah (Santeria plaintiffs seeking to engage in animal sacrifice); Gonzales v. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 2:43 pm
But if their interest in that cause is genuine rather than a case of “fair weather federalism,” they should be working to limit and eventually overrule Gonzales v. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 1:31 pm by Karen Hoffmann
In 2011, the Commission decided Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v. [read post]
17 Aug 2014, 6:46 pm by Bill Otis
 To my knowledge, after dozens if not hundreds of challenges, not a single court has held the CSA unconstitutional, and the most serious challenge to it was rejected almost ten years ago in Gonzales v. [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 9:38 am
Drug laws have been held to be justified under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause; RFRA exemptions from drug laws, as in Gonzales v. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 6:51 am by O. Carter Snead
  In numerous past cases, the Court has recognized free exercise protections (including under RFRA) for non-profit business associations (e.g., Gonzales v. [read post]
Holder, Judge Gonzales Rogers required ICE to give bond hearings to people picked up by ICE in their communities throughout the state of California. [read post]
14 May 2014, 3:47 am by SHG
Gonzales that there already was a right to be forgotten, and Google better shape up. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 9:01 pm by Marci A. Hamilton
The 2006 RFRA Decision Holding That a Small Religious Group Has Rights to Use an Untested and Illegal Drug In 2006, in its first and only RFRA decision on the merits to date, the Supreme Court held in Gonzales v. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 4:32 am
Here’s how Chief Justice John Roberts put it in Gonzales v. [read post]