Search for: "United States v. Lindh"
Results 1 - 15
of 15
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2008, 12:35 am
United States Department of Justice that the petition for commuted sentence of charged Taliban supporter John Walker Lindh [CNN profile] falls under invasion-of-privacy exceptions to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) [text] and may properly be closed to the public. [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 12:25 pm
Last Fall Steve posted about United States v. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 4:43 am
United States, 470 F.3d 804 (9th Cir. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 8:06 pm
For a starting point on the issue of retroactivity of changes in the law, both substantive and procedural, you may wish to review the cases of Lindh v. [read post]
28 Jan 2012, 7:43 am
The Fourth Circuit’s decision here leans heavily on two Supreme Court precedents involving Bivens and the military context, United States v. [read post]
10 Nov 2019, 7:00 am
Prior to the ruling, federal courts were able to prosecute individuals as young as 15 for material support, but in the wake of the Sessions v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 11:17 am
United States, 534 U.S.84, 94 (2001) (quoting Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 7:57 pm
Al-Awlaki obviously was obviously hostile to the United States; in an older world, in which our adversaries were also states, he would have lost his US citizenship as a member of the armed forces of another state. [read post]
22 May 2013, 6:00 am
At that point, he was promptly shifted to a military facility within the United States, but unlike Lindh, Hamdi remained in military custody. [read post]
6 May 2010, 12:04 pm
Afroyim v. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 10:55 am
If our forces attack a Taliban unit and a John Walker Lindh-like character happens to be in that unit, nobody seriously contends that the presence of a U.S. national requires the guns to go silent. [read post]
19 Jun 2008, 1:15 pm
I never said that, the Supreme Court never said that, and I would never do that as President of the United States. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 4:27 am
AEDPA thus imposes a “highly deferential standard for evaluating state-court rulings,” Lindh v. [read post]
12 Nov 2008, 5:54 pm
They want to stay in the United States. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 10:58 am
But in June, the Supreme Court in Holder v. [read post]
