Search for: "Stevens v. The White City" Results 161 - 180 of 266
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2012, 4:00 pm by John Elwood
  First up is the much anticipated City of New Haven v. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 9:30 pm by Kim Kirschenbaum
– Writing for the Court in City of Arlington v. [read post]
11 Nov 2021, 9:03 pm by Laura Welborn
” In a working paper, Steven Salop, professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, and several coauthors discussed the impacts of Ohio v. [read post]
24 Feb 2017, 11:51 am by Mark Walsh
” The case of Martinez-Hidalgo v. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 9:04 am
But what was not similarly clear in the hearing on District of Columbia v. [read post]
14 Jun 2017, 5:44 pm by Eugene Volokh
Likewise, even Supreme Court justices who believe that the government may not endorse religion think that it’s fine for government officials to express religious views in their speeches — here, for instance, is the view of Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in Van Orden v. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 9:05 pm by Alana Bevan
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Zen Magnets v. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 8:49 am by Amy Howe
On January 15, the court issued its first 5-4 decision of the term, in Stokeling v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 9:36 am by Eugene Volokh
What they did have in common was a goal: to keep President-elect Lincoln from the White House. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 7:45 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
Austin Kocher recently noted, those glitches have impacted who gets those appointments: the initial release of CBP One was accompanied by a variety of tech failures that did not necessarily undermine CBP’s ability to fill up its appointments calendar for asylum seekers but did create barriers to entry for migrants who were less tech savvy, could not access high-speed Internet, were part of larger families, or, either directly or indirectly, migrants who were darker-skinned or Black.5 That last… [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 10:32 am by admin
Thaddeus Stevens,18 wanted to grant freed slaves full civil rights, both out of moral sentiment and to create a Republican power base.19 The “black codes”20 and laws that denied freedmen entry into the states21 hampered the Radicals’ goals, as did Supreme Court precedent favoring states rights (often regarding slavery).22 After President Johnson vetoed23 a civil rights bill24 that would have eliminated the black codes, Stevens sought to usurp power from the… [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 9:56 am
The Congress agreed overwhelmingly with the ACLU’s position (that was rejected by Justices Scalia, Rehnquist, White, Stevens and Kennedy), and adopted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 unanimously in the House and by a vote of 97-3 in the Senate. 4. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 11:44 am by Ronald Collins
  On the one hand, TLDB was “first and foremost a defense of Brown v Board of Education,” as Adam White has correctly observed. [read post]