Search for: "United States of America v. Davis" Results 81 - 100 of 425
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Mar 2010, 2:08 pm by UChicagoLaw
Stephen Davis, will be seeking investor feedback on a formal recommendation to the SEC as to its potential response to the Citizens United decision. [read post]
13 Dec 2009, 6:26 am
In October 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an important decision concerning the extraterritorial application of the U.S. securities laws, Morrison v. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 4:31 am by Amy Howe
”  Finally, in another post at Lawfare, Julian Davis Mortenson makes a different point:  “Regardless of how the Supreme Court decides Zivotofsky, it should not invoke the Vesting Clause” – which provides that “[t]he executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America” – “to support its decision. [read post]
28 Jun 2018, 3:51 pm by Rebecca Jeschke
United States:https://www.eff.org/document/woodhull-freedom-foundation-et-al-v-united-states-complaint For more on FOSTA:https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/how-congress-censored-internet Contact:  DavidGreeneCivil Liberties Directordavidg@eff.org AaronMackeyStaff Attorneyamackey@eff.org [read post]
27 Feb 2013, 10:45 pm by Florian Mueller
I guess there are written or at least unwritten rules in the United States that would prevent this from happening in the first place. [read post]
28 May 2006, 5:00 pm
Today is Memorial Day in the United States of America, a day to honor those who made the supreme sacrifice and gave their lives in the service of their country. [read post]
15 Nov 2008, 6:30 pm
United States Dep't of Agriculture    Department of Agriculture 08a0397p.06 Davie v. [read post]
5 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
The United States was a permanent arrangement, created by the people as an aggregated whole rather than by the states. [read post]
23 Sep 2012, 5:28 am by Lee Davis
The data, apparently obtained with a phone company’s help, led to a warrantless search of the motor home and the seizure of incriminating evidence.The majority opinion held that there was no constitutional violation of the defendant’s rights because he “did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the data given off by his voluntarily procured pay-as-you-go cellphone.”The panel drew a distinction between its ruling and a ruling by the Supreme Court last January in United… [read post]
24 May 2017, 2:22 pm by Aurora Barnes
Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit’s reasoning in United States v. [read post]