On the other hand, if the claims of section 1 are correct, then fictionalists do not have a compelling positive argument in favor of their view.
This has triggered Russia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the U.S. and other nations abutting the Arctic to lay claim to sections of the Arctic.
See, however, the discussion of this claim in section 2.2.2 of this article.
The publishers claim the protection of Section 201(c) because users can manipulate the databases to generate search results consisting entirely of articles from a particular periodical edition.
The question is whether a minority group must constitute a majority in a particular district to claim the protection of Section 2 of the act against having district lines redrawn in a way that dilutes the group's ability to elect a representative of its choice.
In Bartlett v. Strickland, No. 07-689, the court will decide whether a minority group must constitute a majority in an election district to claim the protection of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act against having district lines redrawn in a way that dilutes the group's ability to elect a representative of its choice.
A railroad company carrying diseased cattle into a state cannot claim the protection of section 5258, any more than it could when carrying into a state rags known, or which by proper diligence could have been known, to be infected with yellow fever.
We finalize our evaluation by analyzing our previous claim (last paragraph of Section 2).
There is another dangerous possibility lurking in BGP, what Madory calls the "dystopian possibility" that some network — perhaps in a moment when international hostilities are spilling into cyberspace — intentionally claims control of sections of the Internet that don't belong to it.
The provisions of the bill of rights should furthermore not be interpreted in a way which results in courts feeling themselves unduly pressurized by the fear of gambling with the lives of claimants into ordering hospitals to furnish the most expensive and improbable procedures, thereby diverting scarce medical resources and prejudicing the claims of others" (section 58).
Tribe's main argument lies in the claim that Section 111 d) of the Clean Air Act says that the EPA can't regulate an air pollutant if it's already regulating another pollutant from the same source.
