贫穷地活
发表于 2025-3-27 00:40:43
Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard on Affirmative Actiones employed by Harvard College and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Writing for himself and Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, Chief Justice Roberts declared that such policies stood for the proposition “that there is an inherent benefit in race qua race—in race
LINE
发表于 2025-3-27 01:22:15
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8852/885196/885196_32.png
Glucocorticoids
发表于 2025-3-27 08:58:52
on the Constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Actages the adoptive placement of Native American children in Native American households. By a 7–2 vote, the Court repelled an arsenal of constitutional and statutory challenges to the Act and its operation through state courts. The ruling left the important question of ICWA’s compliance with equal pro
宣传
发表于 2025-3-27 11:36:27
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8852/885196/885196_34.png
Ardent
发表于 2025-3-27 14:57:59
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8852/885196/885196_35.png
Irksome
发表于 2025-3-27 21:49:56
and the Regulation of Electionsed Independent State Legislature theory. Plaintiffs argued that the power to design congressional districts was derived solely from the Elections Clause (Art. I, Section 4) of the Constitution. The ability of other branches of government, notably including the judiciary, to tinker with legislative d
花费
发表于 2025-3-27 23:39:09
on the Jurisdiction of Administrative Law Judgestional challenges to administrative proceedings at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Corporations and persons who may be regulated by administrative agencies may now bypass hearings by the administrative law judges (ALJ) within the executive agency when
苦涩
发表于 2025-3-28 05:08:41
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8852/885196/885196_38.png
sundowning
发表于 2025-3-28 07:54:04
on the Jurisdictional Limits of the Clean Water Acttates” to include certain wetlands. While EPA’s interpretation was broad, Supreme Court decisions had over the years concluded that only wetlands “adjacent” to a covered water were protected under the Act. In ., the Court unanimously rejected EPA’s interpretation of “adjacent.” Instead, five justice
放逐某人
发表于 2025-3-28 14:30:29
http://reply.papertrans.cn/89/8852/885196/885196_40.png