Search for: "South Dakota v. Dole"
Results 21 - 40
of 100
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Mar 2015, 10:15 am
Since the relevant part of the ACA is not a statute that offers conditional funds to state governments, but only private citizens, none of the rules laid out in conditional spending cases such as South Dakota v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 2:31 pm
Davis (1937) and South Dakota v. [read post]
16 Nov 2006, 3:23 am
South Dakota v. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 8:21 am
South Dakota v Dole held that the Congress could demand that states raise their drinking age as a condition for receiving federal highway funds. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 10:39 am
North Carolina).It is definitely worth debating these issues on the merits, especially in the unique context of the Spending Clause, where, in my view, there is a fairly strong argument that (so long as the regulation survives South Dakota v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 5:50 am
Here are the questions I've put together for teaching The Health Care Cases, NFIB v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 4:04 pm
This is what the Court did in South Dakota v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 2:37 pm
The Court relied on, seemingly modified, and strengthened at least two existing elements of the test for conditional spending articulated in South Dakota v. [read post]
8 May 2013, 9:01 am
At oral argument in NFIB v. [read post]
24 May 2020, 5:34 am
In the 1987 case, South Dakota v. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 4:59 pm
Regarding conditional federal grants, in 1987 in South Dakota v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 5:19 pm
In contrast, the monies are issue in South Dakota v. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 8:24 am
South Dakota v. [read post]
30 Jun 2017, 11:09 am
That decision in South Dakota v. [read post]
20 Jul 2020, 5:00 am
Sebelius (2012) Module 7: The Spending Power South Dakota v. [read post]
12 Mar 2021, 10:01 pm
The second doctrine stems from South Dakota v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 11:10 am
In in South [Dakota] v. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 6:40 am
” In the key case of South Dakota v. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 11:15 am
., South Dakota v. [read post]
9 Sep 2012, 6:01 pm
(Perhaps South Dakota v. [read post]
