Search for: "United States v. Clinton" Results 1 - 20 of 1,464
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jul 2024, 3:33 am by SHG
” The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, United States v. [read post]
15 Jul 2024, 9:01 am by Benson Varghese
Rejection of Nixon Precedent The court addressed the government’s reliance on a statement in United States v. [read post]
15 Jul 2024, 9:01 am by Benson Varghese
Rejection of Nixon Precedent The court addressed the government’s reliance on a statement in United States v. [read post]
15 Jul 2024, 9:01 am by Benson Varghese
Rejection of Nixon Precedent The court addressed the government’s reliance on a statement in United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2024, 9:24 am
United States, issued this morning.Where is the line between official and unofficial in the charges against Trump? [read post]
29 Jun 2024, 7:57 pm by Josh Blackman
One of my favorite Scalia lines came in Clinton v. [read post]
24 Jun 2024, 10:37 am by Adam Klasfeld
Over the course of two days of oral arguments, former President Donald Trump’s attorneys aimed at the 150-year-old foundations of the practice of appointing special counsels in the United States. [read post]
6 Jun 2024, 5:45 am by Keegan McBride
To prevent China’s influence in the world’s Internet infrastructure, the United States and its allies have heavily resisted Chinese undersea cable projects. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:31 pm by Steven Calabresi
Washington, D.C. super-lawyer, Gene Schaerr, has filed an amicus brief in United States v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]