Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
counterfactual |1946 |especially assumptions that are contrary to fact; Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court, "petitioners' standing does not require precise proof o
Line 24: Line 24:  
|-
 
|-
 
|1900s
 
|1900s
−
|168
+
|169
 
|1940s - [[World War II|WWII]] and postwar transition
 
|1940s - [[World War II|WWII]] and postwar transition
 
|-
 
|-
Line 285: Line 285:  
|1957
 
|1957
 
|an example that is contrary to the proposition. A common point in logical, reasoned debate.
 
|an example that is contrary to the proposition. A common point in logical, reasoned debate.
 +
|-
 +
|counterfactual
 +
|1946
 +
|especially assumptions that are contrary to fact; Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] wrote for the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], "petitioners' standing does not require precise proof of what the Board's policies might have been in that counterfactual world."<ref>''Free Enter. Fund v. Pub. Co. Accounting Oversight Bd.'', 130 S. Ct. 3138, 3163 (2010) (5-4 decision).</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
 
|crackpot
 
|crackpot
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,911

edits

Navigation menu