Search for: "United States of America, Appellant, v. the Washington Post Company et al" Results 1 - 20 of 28
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Mar 2011, 9:11 am by Christa Culver
Washington (2004).Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionAmicus brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers et al.Petitioner's reply Title: Maples v. [read post]
16 Mar 2016, 5:18 am by Ronald K.L. Collins
’ The panel majority struck down this rule, concluding that the label is ‘a metaphor [to] convey moral responsibility for the Congo war’ and that the First Amendment cannot compel companies to make political statements. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 5:43 am by Ronald K.L. Collins
Preska, the Chief Judge of the United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 11:02 am by Kiera Flynn
Ian Ayres et al.Petitioner's reply CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Nov 2010, 5:10 pm by Law Lady
GARLAND GEORGE CURTIS, Defendant-Appellant. 11th Circuit.Criminal law -- Sentencing -- Unopposed motion for continuance of resentencing hearing pending review in United States Supreme Court of decision of United States Court of Appeals which obligates trial court to impose 30-year sentence rather than 17-and-a-half-year sentence initially imposed for offense of production of child pornography for transportation into this country -- Motion granted --… [read post]
2 Sep 2015, 6:43 am by Ronald K.L. Collins
California Teachers Association, et al., the latest public employees union case involving a First Amendment challenge to an opt-out requirement in a union-fee case. [read post]
13 Jul 2016, 4:30 am by Ronald K.L. Collins
The issues in the case are: Whether the endorsement clause is facially unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution or unconstitutional as applied to endorsements of candidates that will not appear in the court for which election is sought; and Whether the campaigning prohibition is facially unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution or unconstitutional as applied… [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 10:27 am by Badrinath Srinivasan
In particular, because of the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 9:49 pm by Ronald K.L. Collins
It wanted to post the following advertisement in Citilink’s buses”: “Citilink refused to allow the ad to be posted. [read post]