Sentences with phrase «arguments in a case challenging»

On 27 September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit hears arguments in a case challenging the regulations, brought by a coalition of 27 states.

Not exact matches

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in NIFLA vs. Becerra, a case challenging current laws that force pro-life pregnancy centers to offer abortion info.

The Challenge of Peace, without reference to the logic of prima facie duties, replicates the structure of Childress» argument exactly: just war theory begins with a presumption against war, and the just war criteria function to override this presumption (or to show that it should not be overridden) in particular cases.

To this end his favorite device is to picture a cosmic assize in which Yahweh is at once plaintiff and judge; he advances his arguments and introduces his witnesses and then challenges the defendants to make out their case.

In any case, having made this terminological clarification, I will now challenge Hasker's parity claim, dealing with his various arguments in roughly the order in which he makes theIn any case, having made this terminological clarification, I will now challenge Hasker's parity claim, dealing with his various arguments in roughly the order in which he makes thein roughly the order in which he makes thein which he makes them.

The report, called «Separating Church and State: The Case for Disestablishment», outlines the central arguments for splitting the church and state and considers the challenges involved in making this a reality.

Public labor members rallied Monday in Albany as the Supreme Court heard the opening arguments of Janus v. AFSCME, a case that challenges automatic union dues paid by public - sector workers.

The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday will hear oral arguments in the case of Shew vs. Malloy, a legal challenge to the key provisions of Connecticut's post-Newtown gun control legislation.

With the U.S. Supreme Court to hear arguments 9 December on a case challenging the use of race - conscious admissions at the University of Texas at Austin, a top AAAS official said there is convincing research on the benefits of a diverse student population in science - related fields.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week heard arguments in a case that is the latest challenge to one of the ways teachers» unions amass their political war chests.

The high court last week heard arguments in the case, a challenge to the constitutionality of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998.

Her testimony in that case would likely challenge any argument that her actions in the current case were, as her attorneys suggest in their motion of opposition, «reasonable» when it comes to the treatment of outdoor cats (owned or unowned).

Specific popular arguments by those who challenge the case for disruptive climate change are addressed in boxes.

On Tuesday a federal court in Washington D.C. heard oral arguments on a historic case — a legal challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency's science - based determination that heat - trapping greenhouse gas pollution is a threat to our health and well - being.

I had the opportunity to solidify my legal and non-legal research and writing skills while working on challenging, and in some cases unprecedented, arguments at the local, state, national, and international level.

«I've seen Al Gore's film twice, but I've also read Michael Crichton's State of Fear, which makes a compelling case on the other side,» says Hug, referring to the controversial 2004 novel in which Crichton — using scientific arguments that were hotly challenged by critics — ridiculed the global - warming consensus as the work of conspiratorial alarmists.

On September 27, 2016, the entire United States District Court for the District of Columbia will hear oral arguments in West Virginia, et al. v EPA, to which E&E Legal is party, challenging the EPA's «Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units» rule under section 111 (d) of the Clean Air Act, over the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) regulation that will cripple, and in many cases, shut down coal - fired power plants.

On September 27, ten judges heard oral arguments in a consolidated case known as West Virginia, et al. v. EPA, which challenges the agency's power to require states to restructure their energy mixes and to reorganize their energy economies across electric plants, energy - intensive industries, and even households.

The new AGFS proposals include: · Fees based on the seriousness and complexity of the work done, · Restoration of separate payments for PTPH, sentence and mentions, · Restoration of payment for the second day of every trial, · Payment of # 300 for trials which become ineffective, · No more arguments over the service of material as evidence, · A near four-fold increase in offence categories to capture the seriousness and complexity of cases, · Restoration of career progression — earnings increase as the work becomes more challenging, and · Encouragement for advocates with the necessary skills to take on more complex cases.

First, the member state could argue that its obligations under EU law take priority over its BIT obligations, in which case the priority of one obligation over the other can only be established by applying conflict rules, but such arguments have not been raised in intra-EU arbitrations (apart from conflict arguments challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunals which is a different matter).

His impressive tally of arguments before the Supreme Court is supported by a strong presence in wider appellate courts, with experience in cases concerning affirmative action policies, environmental disputes and wider constitutional and regulatory challenges.

Georgia Supreme Court to Decide the Future of Lawsuit Lending: Oral arguments over the future of lawsuit lending in Georgia began this week in a case challenging the interest rates on lawsuit loans.

Oral arguments over the future of lawsuit lending in Georgia began this week in a case challenging the interest rates on lawsuit loans.

West Coast LEAF and the Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) were jointly granted leave to intervene in Denton v British Columbia, a case that addresses whether a claimant who was denied workers compensation benefits is barred from challenging that denial on equality grounds under the Charter because she did not raise the argument at an earlier stage of her case.

That kind of argument can be successful only if it challenges the General Court's findings of fact in paragraph 170 of the judgment under appeal, to the effect that «[t] he «last interested person» in the transparent and open tendering procedure in this case was candidate 4.

One of the fun parts of being a lawyer (yet also one of the most challenging parts) is sorting through all of these decisions, analyzing what facts made the cases come out different, and crafting an argument to suggest the black letter law should be interpreted in your favor.

CCLA's advocacy efforts continue to challenge these developments: next year we will make arguments in R. v. Nur and R. v. Smickle, two appellate cases that are bringing constitutional challenges to mandatory minimum sentences.

In cases where the argument on appeal is simply a challenge to the duration of imprisonment, we have consistently held that the sentencing statutes define the outer boundaries of the bell - shaped curve of reasonableness.

The Court heard oral argument this morning in Astrue v. Ratliff, a case challenging the Eighth Circuit's determination that fees awarded to a prevailing party under the Equal Access to Justice Act belong to the attorney, not the client.

In recent cases handed down by the Indiana Supreme Court (Bennett v. Richmond, 960 N.E. 2d 782 (Ind. 2012); Person v. Shipley, 962 N.E. 2d 1192 (Ind. 2012)-RRB-, we see challenges to expert testimony that went too far with arguments for more stringent requirements than are required under IRE 702.

In these exceptional cases, the challenge of establishing what forms part of the factual matrix and is therefore admissible as an aid to interpretation may lead to the examination of the settlement negotiation process by parties hoping to find «admissions of facts» to assist their interpretation arguments.

One of the principal arguments raised by the Attorney General (Canada) was that the plaintiffs» challenge was foreclosed by Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1993] S.C.R. 519, a case involving similar facts and legal argument in which the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the validity of the impugned provisions.

In the Hudbay case it wasn't a pure jurisdiction argument as the company is firmly based in Ontario, but it did challenge the claiIn the Hudbay case it wasn't a pure jurisdiction argument as the company is firmly based in Ontario, but it did challenge the claiin Ontario, but it did challenge the claim.