Search results for: "1002" (189 results)
id. at 1002 (remarks of Sen. Drake) (taking the same view). 458. See, e.g., H.R. REP. NO. 41-22 (1871), reprinted in 2 ESSENTIAL DOCUMENTS, supra
Kysar, Lasting Legislation, 159 U. PA. L. REV. 1002 (2011) (discussing the unusual increase in tax legislation enacted with sunset provi- sions, in
costs, see id. at 1002-03. the yale law journal 130:276 2020 304 This framework has gained traction in other jurisdictions too.141 Judges of
Cir. 1989); United States v. Oliveras, 905 F.2d 623, 632 (2d Cir. 1990); United States v. Rutledge, 28 F.3d 998, 1002 (9th Cir. 1994). 273. See United
& Martin A. Scott, “Street Talk” Summonses in Detroit’s Landlord-Tenant Court: A Small Step Forward for Urban Tenants, 52 J. URB. L. 967, 999-1002 (1975
interests and social costs, see id. at 1002-03. the yale law journal 130:276 2020 304 This framework has gained traction in other jurisdictions too
; FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., 969 F.3d 974, 1002 (9th Cir. 2020); Rambus Inc. v. FTC, 522 F.3d 456, 463 (D.C. Cir. 2008). 363. See Francis, supra note 353, at
Rev. 1002 & n.2 (1924) (explaining that the “stuff of these contests” over constitutional rights “are facts, and judgments upon facts”). See Chicago
COLO. CONST. art. II, § 26, amended by 2018 Colo. Legis. Serv. 18-1002 (West). 245. Villarreal v. Woodham, 113 F.3d 202, 207 (11th Cir. 1997
Justice Scalia, 107 COLUM. L. REV. 1002, 1006 (2007). 189. For unitary executive arguments emphasizing Article II hierarchy, see Calabresi & Prakash