Search for: "Steven Olson" Results 61 - 80 of 267
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Apr 2018, 4:12 am by Edith Roberts
” At the Cato Institute’s Cato at Liberty blog, Walter Olson maintains that with this decision, “[t]he Court has simply made it clear that if the United States courts are to become a sort of human rights policeman to the world, it is Congress that will need to decide to fit them out for that task. [read post]
20 Mar 2018, 4:32 am by Edith Roberts
” At The Economist’s Espresso blog, Steven Mazie surveys the case. [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 1:12 pm by Garrett Hinck
Steven Cook and Amanda Sloat will testify. [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 4:22 am by Edith Roberts
At The Washington Post, Darla Cameron and Kim Soffen analyze the court’s ruling, as does Steven Mazie in The Economist. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 4:26 am by Edith Roberts
” At the Cato Institute’s Cato at Liberty blog, Walter Olson observes that “the five-member majority to stay the Wisconsin order … suggests that at this point it is the conservative side’s case to lose. [read post]
24 May 2017, 4:35 am by Edith Roberts
At the Cato Institute’s Cato at Liberty blog, Walter Olson observes that the decision “is likely to stand as a landmark win for defendants in patent litigation – and, on a practical level, for fairer ground rules in procedure. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 6:14 am by Jonathan H. Adler
In 2013, he delivered the Barbara Olson Memorial Lecture at the annual lawyers convention. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 6:27 am by Jim Sedor
News & World Report – Steven Nelson | Published: 2/9/2017 Alabama Gov. [read post]
8 Jun 2016, 3:35 am by Amy Howe
  Commentary on the grant in Moore comes from Lisa Soronen at the NCSL Blog and Steven Mazie for The Economist. [read post]
29 Apr 2016, 5:10 am by Amy Howe
” And in The Wall Street Journal, Theodore Olson proposes a solution to the deadlock:  “a pact . . . among responsible Republican and Democratic leaders to give well-qualified Supreme Court nominees of either party a hearing and a vote within 120-180 days of a nomination,” which could create “a path toward restoring an atmosphere of respect and civility to this process—and to prospective Supreme Court justices. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 9:30 pm by Kim Kirschenbaum
United States (1997) Justice Stevens thinks it is enough that respondent will be gratified by seeing petitioner punished for its infractions and that the punishment will deter the risk of future harm. . . . [read post]