20 U.S.C. § 701
Omitted
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1966–2003 · leading case: Bd. of Ed. of Cent. Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236 (1968).
Bd. of Ed. of Cent. Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236 (1968). “363 , 20 U. S. C. § 701 et seq. I still subscribe to the belief that tax-raised funds cannot constitutionally be used to support religious schools, buy their school books, erect their buildings, pay their *254 teachers, or pay any other of their maintenance expenses, even to the…”
Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 672 (1971). “" 20 U. S. C. § 701 . *679 This expresses a legitimate secular objective entirely appropriate for governmental action.”
Bidwell v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 286 A.2d 471 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1972). “” 20 U.S. C.A. §701. This Federal grant enables Chatham College to be considered a “publicly assisted educational institution” within the meaning of Section 2801(1) (A) (7) of the Pittsburgh Zoning Ordinance so far as the proposed new buildings are concerned.”
Miller v. Ayres, 191 S.E.2d 261 (Va. 1972). “6 20 U.S.C. § 701 . 7 See fn. 1 supra. 8 Report of the Commission on Constitutional Revision, page 274, N.”
Tilton v. Finch, 312 F. Supp. 1191 (D. Conn. 1970). “The Act’s statement of congressional findings and declaration of policy reads as follows ( 20 U.S.C. § 701 (1964)) : “The Congress hereby finds that the security and welfare of the United States require that this and future generations of American youth be assured ample…”
Paducah Junior Coll. v. Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 255 F. Supp. 147 (W.D. Ky. 1966). “00 under the provisions of the Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963, 20 U.S. C.A. § 701 et seq. Plaintiff alleges jurisdiction in this Court under the Federal Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.”
Lieberman v. State of DE, 70 F. App'x 630 (3rd Cir. 2003). “, (2) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 20 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., (3) the anti-retaliation provisions of the ADA, and (4) the anti-retaliation provisions of the Rehabilitation Act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.