Search results for: "2" (3529 results)
four times.25 16. Id. at 2583. 17. Id. 18. Id. (quoting 26 U.S.C. §§ 5000A(b), (g)(2)). 19. Id.; see also id. at 2656 (Scalia, J., dissenting
en banc). 2. Id. at 21. For the codification of the work product doctrine, see FED. R. CIV. P. 26(b)(3). 3. Textron, 577 F.3d at 30-31. 4. Id
NeJaime & Siegel, supra note 2, at 2519-20. 6. Id. at 2580. 7. See Laycock, supra note 3, at 371 (“Because these conscientious objectors engage in a
371, 374 (1940). 2. See infra Section I.D. the yale law journal 130:276 2020 280 to marry, 3 attention turned to the judgment’s remedial
240. See discussion of subsequent cases infra Section II.B.2.b.ii. 241. 496 U.S. 167 (1990). 242. See id. at 206 (Stevens, J., dissenting
supra Subsection III.A.2. 292. See supra Subsection III.A.1. 293. H.R. 2032, 108th Cong. (2003); S. 971, 108th Cong. (2003). 294. See Harriet
engaging in de novo assessment of scient… 248. See 16 U.S.C. § 803(j)(2)(A) (2018) (regarding due weight); 21 U.S.C. § 811(b) (2018). 250. Id. at 24-25
income taxes for revenue, after the Sixteenth 241. See De Lima, 182 U.S. at 1-2; Goetze, 182 U.S. at 221; Dooley, 182 U.S. at 222; Armstrong, 182
Sticking Point for Striking Actors, CONVERSATION (Sept. 29, 2023, 8:23 AM EDT), http://theconversation.com/the-fight-for-2- how-residuals-became-a
Aug. 29, 1916, ch. 418, §§ 2-3, 39 Stat. 619, 651-66. the yale law journal 130:2110 2021 2120 and (2) review by the President (“confirming