Search for: "United States v. Interstate Commerce Commission"
Results 1 - 20
of 317
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Nov 2022, 1:15 pm
In United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 2:31 pm
Constitution grants power to the federal government to regulate interstate commerce, and early on Chief Justice Marshall ruled that this implies that states cannot interfere with interstate commerce unless Congress explicitly permits them to do so. [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 6:42 am
Clark v. [read post]
Motor Carrier Exemption Applies to Drivers Who can be Expected to Drive Interstate Continue Reading…
19 May 2015, 11:24 am
McComb, a United States Supreme Court case decided in 1947 regarding the jurisdiction of the DOT’s predecessor, the Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”). [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:26 pm
For that purpose we consider the legal position of the subsidiary units of government in the United States and their relationship to federal power. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 2:05 am
§ 2250 for failure to register when the defendant’s underlying offense and travel in interstate commerce both predated the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s enactment ; whether the Ex Post Facto Clause precludes prosecution under § 2250(a) of a person whose underlying offense and travel in interstate commerce both predated SORNA’s enactment. ---: Brief for Petitioner… [read post]
1 Jan 2020, 2:32 pm
United States v. [read post]
19 May 2015, 11:24 am
McComb, a United States Supreme Court case decided in 1947 regarding the jurisdiction of the DOT’s predecessor, the Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”). [read post]
9 May 2011, 9:00 am
For the purpose of this Article, it shall not matter: (a) whether the laws of the Contracting Parties place the offense within the same category of offense or denominate the offense by the same terminology; or (b) whether the offense is one for which United States federal law requires proof of interstate transportation, or use of the mails or of other facilities affecting interstate or foreign commerce, such matters being merely for the purpose of… [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 7:26 am
The United States Supreme Court recently issued its decision in a case that, on the surface, appears to impact the wine and liquor industry. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 8:39 am
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently issued a decision in Illinois Commerce Commission, et al., v. [read post]
31 May 2011, 1:00 pm
Article V concerns capital punishment. [read post]
31 May 2011, 9:00 am
Additional flexibility is provided by Article II(4), which provides that an offense shall be considered an extraditable offense whether or not the laws of the Parties place the offense within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology; and whether or not the offense is one for which the Requesting State’s law requires the showing of such matters as interstate transportation or use of the mails or of other facilities affecting… [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 1:37 pm
United States v. [read post]
11 May 2011, 9:00 am
(Extradition shall also be granted, Article 2 explains, for attempts and conspiracies to commit extraditable offenses, as well as for aiding and abetting the commission of such offenses.) [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 1:00 pm
Article V(1) states that extradition shall not be granted for political offenses. [read post]
29 Aug 2018, 7:03 am
The opinion first recited the history of the dormant Commerce Clause, a doctrine that prevents states from discriminating against interstate commerce or placing undue burdens upon interstate commerce. [read post]
18 May 2011, 1:00 pm
Additional flexibility is provided by Article 2(3), which provides that in determining whether an offense is an extraditable offense, the Contracting States: (1) shall consider only the essential elements of the offense punishable under the laws of both States and disregard that the respective laws do not place the offense within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology, and (2) shall not consider as an essential element of the offense… [read post]
19 May 2011, 1:00 pm
Additional flexibility is provided by Article 2(3), which provides that an offense shall be considered an extraditable offense: whether or not the laws in the Contracting States place the offense within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology; and whether or not the offense is one for which United States federal law requires the showing of such matters as interstate transportation or use of the mails or of other facilities… [read post]
5 May 2011, 9:00 am
The Article also provides that attempts and conspiracies to commit these offenses, and participation in the commission of the offenses, are extraditable. [read post]
