Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 520:
Line 520: + Line 538:
Line 539: +
Donald Trump achievements: The courts (view source)
Revision as of 19:44, June 21, 2019
, 19:44, June 21, 2019→2019: Refs.
*Hurley, Lawrence (June 20, 2019). [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-cross/maryland-peace-cross-can-stand-on-public-land-u-s-high-court-rules-idUSKCN1TL1RI Maryland 'peace cross' can stand on public land, U.S. high court rules]. ''Reuters''. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
*Hurley, Lawrence (June 20, 2019). [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-cross/maryland-peace-cross-can-stand-on-public-land-u-s-high-court-rules-idUSKCN1TL1RI Maryland 'peace cross' can stand on public land, U.S. high court rules]. ''Reuters''. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
*Whelan, Ed (June 20, 2019). [https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/ruling-in-bladensburg-cross-case/ Ruling in Bladensburg Cross Case]. ''National Review''. Retrieved June 21, 2019.
*Whelan, Ed (June 20, 2019). [https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/ruling-in-bladensburg-cross-case/ Ruling in Bladensburg Cross Case]. ''National Review''. Retrieved June 21, 2019.
*Madden, Nate (June 19, 2019). [https://www.conservativereview.com/news/scotus-serves-another-religious-liberty-win-case-peace-cross/ SCOTUS serves up another religious liberty win in the case of the ‘Peace Cross’]. ''Conservative Review''. Retrieved June 21, 2019.
See also:
See also:
*Russell, Nicole (June 20, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/supreme-court-is-clear-government-hostility-to-religion-not-ok Supreme Court is clear: Government hostility to religion not OK]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
*Russell, Nicole (June 20, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/supreme-court-is-clear-government-hostility-to-religion-not-ok Supreme Court is clear: Government hostility to religion not OK]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
See also:
See also:
*Somin, Ilya (June 20, 2019). [https://reason.com/2019/06/20/a-troubling-supreme-court-decision-on-non-delegation/ A Troubling Supreme Court Decision on Non-Delegation]. ''Reason''. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
*Somin, Ilya (June 20, 2019). [https://reason.com/2019/06/20/a-troubling-supreme-court-decision-on-non-delegation/ A Troubling Supreme Court Decision on Non-Delegation]. ''Reason''. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
*Canaparo, GianCarlo; Malcolm, John G. (June 21, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/06/21/supreme-court-misses-opportunity-to-stop-congress-outsourcing-its-power/ Supreme Court Misses Opportunity to Stop Congress Outsourcing Its Power]. ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved June 21, 2019.
*Severino, Carrie (June 21, 2019). [https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/fragmented-gundy-court-suggests-the-nondelegation-doctrine-might-have-a-future/ The Fragmented Gundy Court Suggests the Nondelegation Doctrine Might Have a Future]. ''National Review''. Retrieved June 21, 2019.</ref>
*Severino, Carrie (June 21, 2019). [https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/fragmented-gundy-court-suggests-the-nondelegation-doctrine-might-have-a-future/ The Fragmented Gundy Court Suggests the Nondelegation Doctrine Might Have a Future]. ''National Review''. Retrieved June 21, 2019.</ref>