Search for: "ELENA KAGAN"
Results 41 - 60
of 5,982
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2024, 12:28 pm
” Justice Elena Kagan filed a separate, brief dissent. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 12:15 pm
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan dissented from the decision to vacate the stay while Justices Amy Coney Barret and Brett Kavanaugh concurred. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 3:27 am
Kavanaugh and Elena Kagan, both former White House lawyers, said interactions between administration officials and news outlets provided a valuable analogy. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 9:36 pm
UPDATE: In the original version of this post, I accidentally attributed a statement by Justice Elena Kagan to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 2:07 pm
Justice Elena Kagan was one of the strongest proponents of this idea. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 5:08 am
Here's SCOTUSblog's take:Justice Elena Kagan’s opinion for a sharply divided court in Pulsifer v. [read post]
15 Mar 2024, 2:51 pm
ShareJustice Elena Kagan’s opinion for a sharply divided court in Pulsifer v. [read post]
10 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm
Princeton historian Sean Wilentz says that in their “dissenting-concurrence,” Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson agreed with their colleagues that Trump should not be disqualified “while demolishing the majority’s main argument. [read post]
10 Mar 2024, 12:57 pm
Id. at 461 (Kagan, J., dissenting). [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
And then there was a concurring opinion jointly authored by justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurring in the judgment only, but they too agreed with the heart of the reasoning of the majority.I’ll focus on the consensus view of the court for a moment. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
And then there was a concurring opinion jointly authored by justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurring in the judgment only, but they too agreed with the heart of the reasoning of the majority.I’ll focus on the consensus view of the court for a moment. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:00 am
Raskin’s measure, Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are no longer acting as “real Supreme Court justices. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:43 pm
Concurring only in the judgment, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson believed Colorado on its own could not disqualify Trump. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:09 am
But four justices – Justice Amy Coney Barrett in a separate opinion and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in a joint opinion – argued that their colleagues should have stopped there and not decided anything more. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 7:27 am
Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote concurrences arguing that the court should not have decided how the federal government may enforce Section 3. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 2:25 am
As Elena Kagan famously put it years ago: "We're all textualists now. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 12:32 pm
” Harris offered a long and discursive answer to that question, but then Justice Elena Kagan stepped in and asked him pointedly: “Do you think that the 9th Circuit decided whether the official [sweepstakes] rules supplant the original arbitration agreement’s delegation clause. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 9:24 am
Supreme Court debates whether bump stocks are illegal; ‘You have to apply a little bit of common sense,’ said Justice Elena Kagan, who used to go hunting with the late Justice Antonin Scalia; Justice Sonia Sotomayer was piqued by an ‘arthritis’ defense. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 4:03 pm
Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Elena Kagan questioned Fletcher on how a bump stock functions compared to a fully automatic machinegun and what a shooter using a bump stock has to do to fire a weapon at a higher rate than usual. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 3:41 pm
The problem for the justices, especially Justices Samuel Alito and Elena Kagan, is that deciding whether an interest requirement “significantly interfere[s]” with a bank’s activities seems like a pretty fact-laden inquiry. [read post]
