Search for: "Donald Kagan"
Results 1 - 20
of 557
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 May 2024, 9:01 am
The future of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of former president Donald Trump for the alleged 2020 election conspiracy depends on the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity in three ways. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 11:39 am
In August 2023, a grand jury indicted former President Donald Trump on four charges related to his actions after the 2020 presidential election. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 3:16 pm
” The courtroom is filling up, though we know that the petitioner, former President Donald Trump, is otherwise occupied in a Manhattan courtroom, where the judge denied his request to be allowed to attend the Supreme Court argument in his federal case. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 2:35 pm
Justice Elena Kagan lobbed a series of examples, some taken from the indictment, at Sauer and asked him to identify them as involving private or official conduct. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 1:34 pm
It could also affect the proceedings in the case brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith against former President Donald Trump in a federal court in Washington, D.C. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 7:05 pm
Justice Kagan asked if the required mental state in the statute helps to alleviate that concern. [read post]
4 Apr 2024, 7:17 am
. ____ (2024), that states can’t remove former President Donald Trump from 2024 presidential primary ballots for his role in the events of January 6, 2021. [read post]
20 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm
When the high Court—over an impassioned dissent by Justice Sonia Sotomayor (joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson) and another dissent by Justice Elena Kagan—issued its unexplained order on Tuesday, the Fifth Circuit administrative stay went into effect, thus allowing enforcement of S. [read post]
10 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm
”Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson went even further in showing their displeasure about what the five-Justice majority had done. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
I would not go in the path of the majority has done.And then you have the concurring opinion the concurring opinion by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
I would not go in the path of the majority has done.And then you have the concurring opinion the concurring opinion by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:00 am
Its members including Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 8:13 am
As I explained on January 28, from all that appears in the record, the controversy appeared to have become moot, given that Colorado already included Donald Trump’s name on its primary ballot, which has been sent or handed out to many voters and (presumably) returned by many of those voters to state officials. [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, 12:47 pm
A group of Colorado voters contends that Section 3 of theFourteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits for-mer President Donald J. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:09 am
ShareThe Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states cannot disqualify former President Donald Trump from the ballot for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 7:27 am
The US Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot enforce Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment against federal candidates, keeping former US President Donald Trump on Colorado’s election ballot. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 11:38 pm
Sites with right-wing owners, such as Elon Musk's Twitter/X or Donald Trump's Truth Social nonetheless have content-based restrictions in their terms of service. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 5:51 pm
This is the second in a hopefully finite series of blog posts about the legal issues in the NetChoice cases, in which platforms raise First Amendment challenges to social media laws in Texas and Florida. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 3:33 pm
“[P]ut most baldly,” remarked Justice Kagan at oral argument, “I think that the question that you [counsel for the plaintiffs] have to confront is why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States. [read post]
