Search for: "United States v. California"
Results 1 - 20
of 12,516
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2025, 1:06 pm
Morse (Regulatory Jurisdiction; Amended Complaint; Futility) United States, et al. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2025, 8:40 am
The settlement says: subdivisions (a)(3), (a)(4)(A), and (a)(5) of California Business and Professions Code section 22677 violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution facially and as applied to Plaintiff The state also must pay X $345,576 to cover its challenge costs. [read post]
19 Mar 2025, 8:23 am
Padron signed and initialized a plea form, also known as a Tahl waiver, titled “Immigration Consequences" that expressly said: “I understand that if I am not a citizen of the United States, I must expect my plea of guilty or no contest will result in my deportation, exclusion from admission or reentry to the United States, and denial of naturalization and amnesty. [read post]
19 Mar 2025, 6:30 am
Because it found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their challenge, and the balance of equities tipped in their favor, the court enjoined the enforcement of these portions of the executive orders anywhere in the United States. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 9:01 pm
”[5] The Act does not provide a minimum period to receive comments on rule proposals.[6]But, a comment period of at least 60 days has been endorsed by the Administrative Conference of the United States for significant regulatory actions.[7] Further, executive orders issued by multiple past presidents from both political parties have all recognized the importance of a minimum 60-day comment period.[8] During the past four years, a significant number of proposals had comment… [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 12:19 pm
However, the landmark ruling in American Hospital Association v. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 11:20 am
This temptation is to be resisted, for the United States is not simply one big state. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 11:13 am
As the judge says resignedly, “Taking these provisions directly from a law enacted in the United Kingdom, the California Legislature left it to the courts to pass the CAADCA through the filter of our First Amendment. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 5:51 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2025, 9:05 pm
[1] Unfortunately, under what I will call the Maximization Model of fiduciary duty in the United States and many other jurisdictions, the answer is that there really is a fiduciary duty to destroy the climate when doing so will maximize profits for firms and investors. [read post]
15 Mar 2025, 7:22 am
United Nations Human Rights CommitteeGryk v. [read post]
13 Mar 2025, 8:50 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
13 Mar 2025, 3:41 am
Courts have ruled that employers cannot necessarily use bankruptcy as an automatic shield against WARN Act liability (United Steelworkers of Am. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2025, 7:44 pm
South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. [read post]
12 Mar 2025, 10:20 am
That provision, located in section 237(a)(4)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, makes deportable any “alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States” (emphasis added). [read post]
11 Mar 2025, 7:02 am
In Dewberry Group, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Mar 2025, 7:20 am
United States, 424 U. [read post]
10 Mar 2025, 5:59 am
The practice of penal transportation to the United States abruptly stopped around the time of the Revolutionary War. [read post]
9 Mar 2025, 9:01 pm
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, arguably the most important piece of law enacted anywhere in the world over the last two centuries, opens majestically with these words: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. [read post]
7 Mar 2025, 9:05 pm
In Dred Scott v. [read post]
