Search for: "State v. Gore" Results 421 - 440 of 1,378
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Mar 2017, 4:29 am by SHG
Gore, the case that decided the 2000 presidential election. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 4:45 am by SHG
In the same year, you made it onto the board of the state defender association. [read post]
26 Jan 2017, 4:06 am by SHG
And the state has retained the Godfather of Free Speech, Floyd Abrams, to fight its cause. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 12:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
” On December 12, 2000, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 “per curiam” (non-specially authored) decision, Bush v. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 4:56 am by Timothy P. Flynn
Citing the Bush v Gore SCOTUS decision, Judge Goldsmith found that Stein had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim that further delay of the voter re-count would violate her fundamental constitutional right to a presidential vote under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 11:58 pm
 This was upheld by the Court of Appeal.Brian Cordery reminded the audience of the general principles relating to amendments set out in Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100 and Johnson v Gore Wood [2000] UKHL 65 which prevent re-litigation in circumstances not amounting to strict res judicata. [read post]
19 Nov 2016, 8:42 am by Sandy Levinson
 But one reason is that, for all of the justified outrage over Bush v. [read post]
11 Nov 2016, 9:31 am by Gerard N. Magliocca
Under the Supreme Court's 2015 analysis in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 12:00 pm by Harold O'Grady
Litigation reached the US Supreme Court which ruled on December 12, 2000in the 5–4 decision Bush v. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 11:17 am by Mark Walsh
Morales-Santana does not quite rise to the level of United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 4:02 pm by admin
Gore came down, about the suspense and the hurry and the frantic cite-checking. [read post]
28 Oct 2016, 7:24 am by Stephen Wermiel
Gore ruling, few experts would have argued that resolving election disputes was a strong suit of the justices. [read post]