Search for: "United States v. Ramsey" Results 41 - 60 of 171
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jul 2012, 10:08 am by Kali Borkoski
§ 1350, allows courts to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law of nations occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 1:30 pm by Karen Tani
By the time the year was over, thirty-eight Dakota men had been hanged in the largest mass execution in United States history. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 9:40 am by Amy Howe
Windsor in United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 4:24 am
., on the exception to the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement that encompasses searching the luggage - and laptops - of people entering or leaving the United States. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 1:47 am by Tom Pritchard
Justice Ramsey ruled against the Council stating that the word “default” meant default in relation to the provisions of the 1984 Act and not the 1957 or 1974 Acts. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 10:12 am by Michael Ramsey
  Further, it may be the case that Congress would have understood the international law governing U.S. residents to be among the “laws of the United States” that convey Article III jurisdiction. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 6:24 am by Trey Childress
As many of our readers know, we are anxiously awaiting the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel v. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 10:20 am
PREPARED BY: Michael Chernicoff Looser Rules on Sentencing Stir Concerns About Equity [] The Supreme Court cases of The United State v. [read post]
12 Jan 2024, 9:30 pm by ernst
  Mark Graber disputes the significance of the latest discovery of Josh Blackman and Seth Barrett Tillman related to whether the President is an Office of the United States for purposes of Section 3 of the fourteenth Amendment (Balkinization).ICYMI: The failed attempt to rename Brown v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 2:26 pm by NARF
(Navajo and Hopi Indian Land Settlement Act of 1974)United States v. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 4:39 am by Amy Howe
United States, in which the Court will consider whether a commercial fisherman violated the anti-shredding provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act when he destroyed several undersized fish. [read post]