Search results for: "2" (2803 results)
with far greater scope and impact. 25. KY. REV. STAT. ANN. § 532.300(2) (West 2021); N.C. GEN. STAT. § 15A-2011(a), (c) (2012) (re- pealed 2013). A
BEDOYA 6/23/2006 1:34:11 PM 2112 Alvaro Bedoya The Unforeseen Effects of Georgia v. Ashcroft on the Latino Community abstract. In Georgia v. Ashcroft, the Supreme ...
2504 (2009). 2. Id. at 2516. 3. LAUGHLIN MCDONALD, AMERICAN INDIANS AND THE FIGHT FOR EQUAL VOTING RIGHTS (2010) [hereinafter MCDONALD, AMERICAN
press-office/2017/02/21/press -briefing-press-secretary-sean-spicer-2212017-13 [http://perma.cc/G89C-GJFF]. 2. Erica Meltzer, A video Shows ICE Agents
11. See 2 U.S. GOV’T ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, GAO-04-261SP, PRINCIPLES OF FEDERAL APPRO- PRIATIONS LAW 3 (3d ed. 2004). 12. See SCOTT A. FRISCH, THE
DAILY OHIO STATESMAN, May 15, 1849, at 2. 109. See infra notes 212-224 and accompanying text. the yale law journal 121:1528 2012 1548
196, 1967 U.S.C.C.A.N. (81 Stat. 581) 633 (codified at 2 U.S.C. § 2c (2000)). The Supreme Court ruled in Wood v. Broom, 287 U.S. 1 (1932), that the
obligations. For further discussion, see infra text accompanying notes 28-29. R&M_PRESS_V2WEB.DOC 4/27/2010 2:26:38 PM disestablishing the family 1239
discussed in more detail infra Part VII.A.2. 27. See infra Part VII.A.2. 28. See infra Part VII.B.2. 29. See infra Part VII.B.2. the yale law
International Cases, 150 F.R.D. 221, 242 (1993). For a good account of the amendment’s history, see id. IONTCHEVA FINAL.DOC FEBRUARY 19, 2001 2/19/01 3:50