Search for: "State v. Self" Results 81 - 100 of 15,604
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Apr 2024, 3:59 pm by Michael C. Dorf
After rage-tweeting throughout the oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 3:45 pm
Justice Barrett observes that immunity will protect the ex-President in his state court cases — where it is especially needed:Let me ask you about state prosecutions because, if the president has some kind of immunity that's implicit in Article II then that immunity would protect him in -- from state prosecutions as well. [read post]
24 Apr 2024, 5:57 am by Norman L. Eisen
The Hungarian’s self-proclaimed drive toward an “illiberal state” has seen extensive democratic backsliding. [read post]
23 Apr 2024, 6:41 am by Dan Bressler
” “In support of this argument, IMTC cited two foreign (and therefore non-binding) cases in which no conflict of interest was found to exist: Jones v AMP Perpetual Trustee Company NZ Ltd (1994) (New Zealand) and HSBC (HK) Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice (2001) (Hong Kong). [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 4:01 am by Deanne Sowter
Trial Decision In SZM v KMN, 2023 BCSC 940 (CanLII), the father (claimant) had counsel and the mother (respondent) was self-represented. [read post]
20 Apr 2024, 6:37 pm
-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had little justification in the internationallaw the United States claimed to be upholding, and the United States prosecuted the wars whileindifferent to the civilian casualties they imposed. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 7:49 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit had to grapple with the question of “whether the compelled use of Payne’s thumb to unlock his phone was testimonial,” the ruling in United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 12:13 pm by Jon Brodkin
The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit had to grapple with the question of "whether the compelled use of Payne's thumb to unlock his phone was testimonial," the ruling in United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 10:20 am by David Aaron
It targets non-U.S. persons who are outside the United States and authorizes the government to compel certain communication service providers within the United States to assist the government in acquiring those targets’ communications. [read post]