Search for: "Plante v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 4,534
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2023, 10:41 am by Angelo A. Paparelli
§ 292.1 authorize attorneys to represent noncitizens in a variety of immigration benefits requests, federal statutes and immigration officers often plant barriers that impede effective legal representation.Consider these examples: The Supreme Court will soon decide United States v. [read post]
17 May 2023, 3:22 pm by NARF
State of Alaska, Dept. of Health & Social Serivces, Office of Children's Services (Indian Child Welfare Act) State of Oklahoma v. [read post]
17 May 2023, 6:00 am by Karen Tani
Observing that “[m]edical certification” of disability had “become one of the major paths to public aid in the modern welfare state,” Stone wondered whether policymakers were asking the “concept of disability” to do too much and whether they were sufficiently alert to the concept’s tendency to expand over time.Filed in 1983 and decided by the Supreme Court in 1990, Sullivan v. [read post]
15 May 2023, 9:12 am by The Regulatory Review Staff
May 9, 2022 | Aborting the Right to Abortion | A leaked draft of a Supreme Court opinion turns the national debate over Roe v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 6:07 am by Evan George
Then a coalition of states and environmental groups challenged the denial, and the result was the landmark decision Massachusetts v. [read post]
10 May 2023, 4:00 am by Administrator
In the 1929 Persons case, Viscount Sankey of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of the United Kingdom, which was, at the time, Canada’s highest court, said, “The British North America Act planted in Canada [is] a living tree capable of growth and expansion within its natural limits. [read post]
4 May 2023, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
G expressed disagreement with the core of ISL—that elected state legislatures were freed of the state constitutions that created those very legislatures by virtue of something in the federal Constitution. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 9:22 am by Miquel Montañá (Clifford Chance)
In this regard, in its judgment of 12 December 2013 (case C-493/12, Eli Lilly v Human Genome Sciences), the CJEU made the following observations: “30. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 7:24 am by Dan Farber
Ever since the Supreme Court decided West Virginia v. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 5:31 am by Emma Svoboda
On April 19, the Supreme Court delivered a decision in Türkiye Halk Bankasi S.A. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2023, 5:50 am by INFORRM
The report stated that, on a specific setting, correct matches were made 89% of the time and there was no statistically significant gender or race bias. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 12:30 pm by John Ross
[Vaccinated jurors, a parking monopoly, and plant-based meat.] [read post]