Search for: "United States v. Olson" Results 101 - 120 of 443
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jan 2009, 9:00 pm
David Bederman of Atlanta will argue for the petitioner, Carter Phillips of Washington, D.C., will argue for the respondent, and Douglas Hallward-Driemeier of the Solicitor General’s office will argue as amicus curiae for the United States. [read post]
And if a judge’s personal characteristics were relevant, why shouldn’t the six current United States Supreme Court justices who are Catholics be excluded from ruling on a case about the religious freedom of Catholics? [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 4:46 am by Amy Howe
United States, on which Lyle Denniston reported for this blog. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 2:14 pm by Quinta Jurecic
As to Miller’s position that Congress has not authorized Mueller’s work by statute, the court simply pointed to United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 6:54 am by Amy Howe
United States, reversing a Pennsylvania man’s conviction for making threats on Facebook. [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 6:17 am by Marissa Miller
” Writing for Cato At Liberty, Walter Olson previews Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 9:31 am
JOSEFFER (ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING THE PETITIONER): The United States view — I’m not sure exactly how much we disagree on this — but the United States view is that, for example, a blank disk is not a component of this invention because you don’t need a blank disk to practice this invention. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 5:20 am by Amy Howe
United States, the Court held that a provision of the federal bank fraud statute which makes it a crime to “knowingly execut[e] a scheme . . . to obtain” property owned by, or under the custody of, a bank “by means of false or fraudulent pretenses” does not require the government to prove that a defendant intended to defraud a financial institution. [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 10:52 am
United States, 440 U.S. 48 (197) that state law determines rights and obligations when the Bankruptcy Code does not supply a federal rule. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 1:58 pm by David Kopel
This includes the state’s right-to-carry statute, the Minnesota Citizens’ Personal Protection Act, which is one of the strongest such laws in the United States. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 6:45 am by Conor McEvily
Static Control Components and United States v. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 8:18 am by Ronald Collins and David Skover
Waxman), and certain Democratic Members of the United States House of Representatives (Paul M. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 2:27 pm by Josh Blackman
United States held that Congress cannot strip the president’s absolute authority to fire officers who are subject to his control. [read post]