Search results for: "The" (6958 results)
“constitutional law” and “conventions of the constitution”). These are important, but they are not the primary reason people say that the English constitution
courts have followed the lead of Michigan Chemical and Pincoffs.78 72. These first two theories should converge in products liability, where there
court that he would have chosen the latter rather than risk trial. These “buyer’s remorse” claims are easily made, and they are by their nature
representatives through which they can ex- press support or discomfort with the Fed’s role in the economy.235 One role for courts, then, is to prompt these
D.D.C. 2012) (“While these Guidelines are not official federal regulations, and therefore not binding on the Court, they are often considered when
sponsorship by the government. I consider them separately because these two types of sentences are imposed for different reasons. Judges impose government
offer] route.’ But I believe there may be lawyers who, when they observe some reluctance on the part of their controlling stockholder
to match those of the President. This guidance therefore tells agencies where to direct their internal efforts. Not surprisingly, these initiatives
clauses in their rules because they do not receive a deference pay-off when they do. We conclude, therefore, that if courts want to capture the potential
individual component states of the federation. These values resonate with the broader federalism literature, where there is a well-theorized tension