Search

Search results for: "2" (3529 results)

A “Full and Fair” Discussion of Environmental Impacts in NEPA EISs: The Case for Addressing the Impact of Substantive Regulatory Regimes

2.2-9, 2.6-1 & 2.6-2 (2009) hereinafter W. Area Power Admin., EIS 20090197. Compare, e.g., W. Area Power Admin., EIS 20070450, supra note Error

Torres-SpelliscyFinalDraft_tsv4k4ob

]. 121. See Chris Cillizza, Steve Bannon Was Knee-Deep in January 6, CNN (Sept. 24, 2021, 2:27 AM EDT), https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/23/politics/steve

Microsoft Word - Weidenhammer_post_FLIP2.doc

omitted). 181. See, e.g., Brief of Amicus Curiae American Airlines at 2, Aspen Skiing (No. 84-510). WEIDENHAMMER_POST_FLIP2.DOC 10/22/2004 12:36:49

ParikhYLJForumEssay_ugvhskwa

See Nora F. Engstrom, The Lessons of Lone Pine, 129 YALE L.J. 2, 22-23 (2019). 75. See id. at 24 (“Generally, in mass-tort cases, some injury

F9.ParikhFinalDraftforWeb_23aj5xar

actually litigated. See Nora F. Engstrom, The Lessons of Lone Pine, 129 YALE L.J. 2, 22-23 (2019). 75. See id. at 24 (“Generally, in mass-tort cases, some

F9.ParikhFinalDraftforWeb_iw83mth1

actually litigated. See Nora F. Engstrom, The Lessons of Lone Pine, 129 YALE L.J. 2, 22-23 (2019). 75. See id. at 24 (“Generally, in mass-tort cases, some

Microsoft Word - 18. Goldstein Book Review Final Draft APPROVED.docx

elected officials, and interest groups. 23. BARKOW, supra note 2, at 39. 24. Id. at 40. 25. Id. at 56. 26. Id. at 73. 27. Id. at 105. the yale law

Microsoft Word - 18. Goldstein Book Review Final Draft APPROVED.docx

officials, and interest groups. 23. BARKOW, supra note 2, at 39. 24. Id. at 40. 25. Id. at 56. 26. Id. at 73. 27. Id. at 105. the yale law journal

Forum: A Defense of Immigration-Enforcement Discretion: The Legal and Policy Flaws in Kris Kobach’s Latest Crusade

codifying sections 212(a)(9)(A), 235(b)(1)(A)(i), and 235(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the INA); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1.2, 235.3(c), 1003.19(h)(2)(i)(B) (2012). But because

Microsoft Word - Erbsen.docx

elsewhere, including, 2. See id. at 2088 (majority opinion) (noting varying estimates of increased state tax revenue). 3. See Brian Deagon, E-Commerce