Search for: "United States v. Interstate Commerce Commission"
Results 101 - 120
of 331
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Dec 2018, 1:00 am
They may, however, violate the Dormant Commerce Clause, which generally prevents States from “discriminat[ing] against interstate commerce” or “favor[ing] in-state economic interests over out-of- state interests,” if they fail to similarly address out-of-state and domestic products. [read post]
19 Dec 2018, 9:21 am
He has also said the court should scrap the dormant commerce clause, the doctrine that says that because Congress regulates interstate commerce, states can’t interfere with such commerce. [read post]
16 Nov 2018, 5:00 am
The term also means (1) any agent of such a person, and (2) a State or political subdivision of a State and any agency or instrumentality of a State or a political subdivision of a State, and any interstate agency, but such term does not include the United States, or a corporation wholly owned by the Government of the United States. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 10:38 am
… The term also means (1) any agent of such a person, and (2) a State or political subdivision of a State and any agency or instrumentality of a State or a political subdivision of a State, and any interstate agency, but such term does not include the United States. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 12:38 pm
But no such painful dilemma threatens the United States today. [read post]
4 Oct 2018, 2:00 am
In Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. [read post]
26 Sep 2018, 2:32 pm
Gutierrez The Supreme Court of the United States will begin its upcoming session on Monday, October 1, 2018. [read post]
24 Sep 2018, 10:31 am
Mount Lemmon Fire District v. [read post]
18 Sep 2018, 1:19 pm
Supreme Court in Hughes v. [read post]
31 Aug 2018, 9:14 am
, United States v. [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]
17 Aug 2018, 3:52 am
This means understanding how the United States Sentencing Manual works alongside corresponding case precedent (e.g., United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 2:20 pm
The RSIB states that the Louisiana Sales and Use Tax Commission for Remote Sellers (the “Commission”) “will not seek to enforce any sales or use tax collection obligation on remote sellers based on United States Supreme Court’s decision in South Dakota v. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 9:30 pm
For example, in United States v. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 9:22 am
United States, 581 U.S., 137 S. [read post]
17 Jul 2018, 4:24 pm
” David Spade 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]
28 Jun 2018, 7:48 am
The RLA granted collective-bargaining rights to railroad workers to prevent disruption of interstate commerce caused by labor disputes. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 3:22 pm
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that SEC administrative law judges are “officers of the United States” and thus under the appointments clause must be tapped by the president or “department head,” in this case the SEC itself (not by commission staff). [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 10:30 am
The law expressly provides, however, that Act No. 5 “shall apply to all taxable periods beginning on or after the date of the final ruling of the United States Supreme Court in [South Dakota v. [read post]
