Search results for: "2" (2803 results)
services based on a protected classification—fails). 16. COLO. REV. STAT. § 24-34-601(2)(a) (2024). the yale law journal forum January 14, 2025 274
Blindness, 128 YALE L.J. 2, 40-46 (2018). 26. 461 U.S. 660 (1983); see also Tate v. Short, 401 U.S. 395 (1971); Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235
harassment provisions have much in common, the FEHA provides protections and benefits that Title VII does not, 23. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) (2012). 24
State Gov’t § 2-1238(3) (West 2016). × See, e.g., Arizona Drafting Manual, supra note 53, at iv (“Changes in the 2015-2016 Arizona Legislative Bill
2025/01/30/271058.htm [https://perma.cc/F4V3-78JF]. 212. CAL. CODE REGS. tit. 10, § 2644.9 (2025); ALA. CODE. § 27-31D-2 (2024). At least twelve other
Stat. 297, 299 (codified at 2 U.S.C. § 622(3) (2006)); MINN. STAT. § 270C.11 (2011), available at https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=270C.11; 32 VT
Chewing Gum, Inc., 202 F.2d 866, 868 (2d Cir. 1953); Westfall & Landau, supra note 2, at 76-89. 8. Miller v. Comm’r, 299 F.2d 706, 709-10 (2d Cir. 1962
Ct. 1803, 1830 n.2 (2010). the yale law journal online 121:121 2011 122 distinguishable.”4 As a result, the lower court’s finding of standing was
U.S. tax, or (2) it should be denied Type III benefits. In a way, the enactment of IRC Section 7874, IRS Notice 2014-52, IRS Notice 2015-79, and the
2), (c) (2012) (emphasis added); cf. Stack, supra note 24, at 581 (“By requiring that the statutory authority of a presidential order be identifiable