Search for: "Warren v. Clerk of Court"
Results 201 - 220
of 222
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2010, 7:37 am
” PrawfsBlawg has a follow-up piece on the Court’s recent decision in Christian Legal Society v. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 2:39 pm
The Senate could defund the Court, turn off the lights, eliminate law clerks, and so on, but those remedies are unlikely. [read post]
13 Jan 2023, 6:30 am
John Ely cast his representation-reinforcement theory partly as a defense of Warren Court liberalism, though he rejected Roe v. [read post]
28 Jul 2022, 12:33 pm
Looking through the group photos of the Warren Court, and on, I see mostly bare faces. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 7:47 am
More on on Jurek v. [read post]
27 May 2013, 12:09 pm
A clerk? [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 3:57 pm
Also filing into that gallery are the justices’ law clerks and a few other court employees. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 5:04 pm
But is it possible clerks were listening to the call? [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 8:17 am
To be sure, Bickel was more than willing to defend Brown v. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 2:35 pm
See also Warren v. [read post]
9 Apr 2010, 1:01 pm
Brennan Jr., who along with Justice Douglas had been liberal stalwarts of the Warren court era. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 1:44 pm
Stewart will say later that even after the court’s decision in Matal v. [read post]
4 Mar 2020, 7:56 am
[Neither Amicus gave the CFPB the defense it needed] Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard argument in Seila Law v. [read post]
12 Aug 2022, 4:00 am
Herrera Velutini and Rossini allegedly paid more than $300,000 to consultants who supported Vázquez Garced’s campaign. [read post]
30 May 2021, 12:09 pm
Bar Assoc. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 9:01 pm
Hobby Lobby and Zubik v. [read post]
27 Sep 2010, 3:34 am
Yet the Court hasn’t struck down a law on so-called “nondelegation” grounds for over 70 years. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 12:15 pm
In his dissent from denial of cert earlier this year in Silvester v. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 12:00 pm
But there’s another reason I chose to structure the book in this way, which is to challenge how court-watchers talk about the court. [read post]
