Back to Network
11
Shared Docs
11
Same-Page
11 / 11
Mentions
Document Mentions (11 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
.3d at 54. Otherwise, the statute applies to past conduct unless doing so would create impermissible retroactive effects. Id. The Court begins with Landgraf s first step. To assess a statute's meaning here, courts must consider the text of the statute along with other indicia of congressional intent, inc
207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 16 of 34 However, it also concludes that even if the statute were ambiguous, it would properly apply to these charges. At Lanfgraf s second step, the Court asks whether application of the statute to past conduct would have impermissible retroactive effects. "[A] statute has pres
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (81)
Entities connected to both Landgraf and Lanfgraf
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON31 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
United States
LOCATION29 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
USI Film Products
ORGANIZATION25 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON22 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Supreme Court
ORGANIZATION21 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Reid Weingarten
PERSON21 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
FBI
ORGANIZATION21 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Eric Holder
PERSON20 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Leahy
PERSON20 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Bridges
PERSON20 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
SC
Schneider
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Napolitano
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
ET
Emmy Taylor
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
AN
Annabi
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
SA
Salameh
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
BO
Bortnovsky
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
JO
Josephberg
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
Vernon
PERSON19 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
SA
Santobello
PERSON18 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf
NE
Nejad
PERSON18 w/ Landgraf·11 w/ Lanfgraf