Search results for: "n" (3654 results)
77 THE YALE LAW JO URN AL FORUM J U N E 1 3 , 2 0 1 6 Pre-Exposure Prophylax is (PrEP) and Criminal L iabi l i ty Under State
thanks to Bruce Ackerman, Jack Balkin, Nancy Cott, Ariela Dubler, Lee Epstein, Risa Goluboff, Dawn Johnsen, Douglas NeJaime, Robert Post, Gerald N
of the holding is that . . . .”). 193. 527 U.S. 666, 678 n.2 (1999) (second alteration in original). 194. Note that these two cases each overrule a
80 n.7 (D. Mass. 2001) (“The plaintiffs offer only ‘naked statistical proof,’ a type of evidence that the Massachusetts courts have found
do not see any need for doing so here . . . .” (citation omitted)); see also Verlinden B.V. v. Cent. Bank of Nig., 461 U.S. 480, 491 n.17 (1983
II, No. 3:10-cv-91, 2011 WL 285683, at *29 (N.D. Fla. Jan. 31, 2011); State Attorneys General I, 716 F. Supp. 2d at 1164 n.21. bad news for mail
Independence Institute as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents (Minimum Coverage Provision), at 19 & n.10, 25-28 & nn.14-23, U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human
1995) (emphasis added); see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425, 1509 n.329 (1987) (“[T]he non-suspension clause
186 n.1 (1994) (Souter, J., concurring). 19. See, e.g., N.L.R.B. v. Noel Canning, 134 S. Ct. 2550, 2570 (2014); Nixon v. Adm’r of Gen. Servs., 433
Operators’ Fifth Amendment Claims Applied to Digital Must-Carry, 58 FED. COMM. L.J. 281, 304 n.155 (2006) (noting that Penn Central “may not be