Search for: "The PEOPLE v. Bruce" Results 1 - 20 of 794
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Mar 2025, 6:55 am by Ryan Goodman
“I don’t believe there were ever any career people fired at transition since the national security division was founded,” McCord said. [read post]
3 Mar 2025, 6:57 am by Dan Bressler
At least that’s what a Magistrate Judge in the District of New Jersey decided last week in Harish v. [read post]
2 Jan 2025, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
In his post-submission brief, Petitioner argues that these statements were "within his First Amendment rights as recognized in Republican Party of Minnesota v. [read post]
16 Dec 2024, 7:17 am by Erik J. Heels
If you plan for people and places, you get people and places. [read post]
3 Nov 2024, 1:15 am by Frank Cranmer
The role of Special Envoy was previously held by the Conservative MP Fiona Bruce, who had campaigned on the issue before Parliament was abruptly dissolved and who lost her seat at the General Election. [read post]
14 Aug 2024, 12:30 pm by Guest Blogger
But then, even though the Supreme Court finally approved a state relief measure for those who couldn’t pay their mortgages in Home Building and Loan Association v. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 6:30 am by JB
For each symposium, the date assigned is the date of the last in the series of posts.Many thanks to all of the people who've written for us over the years. [read post]
4 Jul 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
The ambiguity surrounding ESG serves people trying to use corporate or investor assets for their own ends. [read post]
4 Jul 2024, 1:06 pm by Randy E. Barnett
(2021) Donald Drakeman, The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory: Why We Need the Framers (2021) Jamal Greene, How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights is Tearing America Apart (2021) David Schwartz, The Spirit of the Constitution: John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 12:31 pm by Joseph Fishkin
The Supreme Court today took the narrowest and simplest route to upholding an obscure tax provision in Moore v. [read post]