Search for: "STANFORD v. STATE"
Results 81 - 100
of 2,185
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2024, 3:37 am
And don’t get me started on the Reasonably Scared Cop Rule of Graham v. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 2:04 pm
That is, after all, what the text of the Impeachment Clause actually states. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 5:51 pm
In 1995 the Court identified state interests that might justify the rules. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 5:51 pm
In 1995 the Court identified state interests that might justify the rules. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 4:00 am
The most obvious class of examples, as I discussed on Monday and as I explain at greater length in the article, consists of so-called "percentage" plans by which various states guarantee admission to a state university to students graduating in a specified top percentage of their respective high school classes.For example, in his dissent in Fisher v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
In short, the court concluded in LePage v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 2:16 pm
For example, in Smith v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 5:50 am
The better answer, we argue here and in a forthcoming article in the Stanford Law Review, is to rely on legitimate, collective countermeasures to continue to freeze Russian central bank assets until Russia meets its obligation to pay reparations. [read post]
SCOTUS Repeated Relisting of a Case on the Meaning of Race Neutrality--and a Plug for my new Article
19 Feb 2024, 4:00 am
Sonja Starr in the Stanford Law Review. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 11:41 pm
” That case, now styled Murthy v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 11:00 pm
, 48 Stanford Law Review 113 (1995-1996). [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 9:30 pm
(Infodocket) ICYMI, Trump v. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 6:33 am
Susan V. [read post]
28 Jan 2024, 4:48 pm
How do the NetChoice cases relate to Murthy v. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 7:54 pm
As we read the brief, the Amars have retreated from the central position they put forward in an influential 1995 Stanford Law Review article. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 4:35 pm
Sunstein Administrative Law Scholars Amici Brief: SEC v. [read post]
25 Jan 2024, 11:40 am
What began as an exploratory brainstorm at the Stanford Generative AI and Law Workshop[7] became active and ongoing solicitations of input from legal and technical experts across a spectrum of industry verticals; and eventually, evolving to a formalized set of guiding principles.[8] The outcomes of the initial report demonstrated that existing responsibilities of legal professionals (e.g. [read post]
22 Jan 2024, 11:07 am
He was interviewed by Stanford Legal co-hosts Richard Thompson Ford, the George E. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 8:53 am
Mata v. [read post]
15 Jan 2024, 12:20 am
Denys Stanford in the Vale [2019] ECC Oxf 1. [read post]