Search for: "United States v. Regents of University of California"
Results 21 - 40
of 226
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2022, 3:00 am
(2) Does the Federal Power Act preempt state court challenges to an environmental impact report prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act in order to comply with the federal water quality certification under the federal Clean Water Act? [read post]
31 Oct 2021, 11:03 am
Publishing that research may drive businesses away from California, thus harming the California economy and indirectly the University of California itself. [read post]
5 Oct 2021, 8:21 am
Professor of Law & Director of Clinical Legal Education, UC Davis School of Law--Robert Cover as Critical Race Theorist Mark Graber, University System of Maryland Regents Professor, University of Maryland Carey School of Law & Sandford V. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 9:37 am
State, 281 Cal. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 5:01 am
Regents of the University of California, faulting the Trump administration’s stated reasoning for rescinding Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), the administration’s wisest approach may be a fresh, more comprehensive explanation of its reasons for ending MPP. [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 11:15 am
Regents of the University of California, which rejected the Trump administration’s efforts to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, an Obama-era policy that protected people who were brought as children to the U.S. without authorization. [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 5:51 am
Citing DHS v. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 6:38 pm
Regents of the University of California, which rejected the Trump administration’s efforts to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, an Obama-era policy that protected people who were brought as children to the U.S. without authorization. [read post]
2 Aug 2021, 4:52 pm
Regents of the University of California that a patient did not retain a property interest in tissue extracted from him. [read post]
2 Aug 2021, 4:52 pm
Regents of the University of California that a patient did not retain a property interest in tissue extracted from him. [read post]
19 Jul 2021, 10:38 am
Regents of the University of California. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 2:41 pm
Regents of the University of California. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 5:01 am
Robins, which upheld a state law rule that required large shopping malls to allow leafleters and signature gatherers (a rule that has since been applied by some lower courts to outdoor spaces in private universities[113]); Turner Broadcasting System v. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 9:05 pm
Regents of the University of California involved the legality of executive actions related to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. [read post]
28 May 2021, 6:32 am
See Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. [read post]
10 Feb 2021, 5:01 am
Regents of University of California, the court took pains to avoid declaring any judicial or congressional limits on DHS’s prosecutal discretion when it rebuked the Trump administration’s attempt to repeal DACA. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 3:00 am
(2) Does the Federal Power Act preempt state court challenges to an environmental impact report prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act in order to comply with the federal water quality certification under the federal Clean Water Act? [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 3:00 am
(2) Does the Federal Power Act preempt state court challenges to an environmental impact report prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act in order to comply with the federal water quality certification under the federal Clean Water Act? [read post]
27 Oct 2020, 2:00 am
Regents of the University of California, et al. agreeing with some federal courts that the reasoning given for DACA’s rescission was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations. [read post]
27 Oct 2020, 2:00 am
Regents of the University of California, et al. agreeing with some federal courts that the reasoning given for DACA’s rescission was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations. [read post]
