Search for: "Wendel V. Wendel" Results 261 - 280 of 670
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm by Graham Smith
 Limits on powers v safeguards The Act is underpinned by the assumption that breadth of powers can be counterbalanced by safeguards (independent prior approval, access restrictions, oversight) and soft limits on their exercise (necessity and proportionality). [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm by Graham Smith
In human rights terms that could amount to failure to respect the essence of privacy and freedom of expression: a power that no amount of necessity, proportionality, oversight or safeguarding can legitimise.Limits on powers v safeguardsThe Act is underpinned by the assumption that breadth of powers can be counterbalanced by safeguards (independent prior approval, access restrictions, oversight) and soft limits on their exercise (necessity and proportionality). [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 9:30 pm by RegBlog
A Debate Over the Use of Cost-Benefit Analysis September 26 – September 27 With its opinion last year in Michigan v. [read post]
25 Dec 2016, 9:31 pm by RegBlog
  Still Seeking Contraceptive Compromise After Zubik v. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 3:30 am by Kris Miccio
The case of Buck v Bell stains not only the early history of Progressives, adherents to eugenics, but the legacy of Oliver Wendell Holmes who opined, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough,” as he upheld the forced sterilization of women. [read post]
30 Nov 2016, 4:42 am by SHG
In the most legal academic of fashions, Feldman that starts to gift wrap his initial conflation of fact and interpretation: Start with the famous metaphor introduced by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes almost 100 years ago, in a dissent in the 1919 case Abrams v. [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 2:04 pm by Sandy Levinson
 With respect, try telling that first to Eugene V. [read post]
5 Oct 2016, 5:00 am by Ian Ayres
  An analogous dynamic is described in the famous Delaware Chancery case, Smith v. [read post]
4 Oct 2016, 7:49 am by Sandy Levinson
 Barnett's critique of "minimum rationality" when used mindlessly to uphold rent seeking regulation like that in Williamson v. [read post]
20 Sep 2016, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
Of the justices now on the Court, Samuel Alito seems the most likely to find merit in legal protection for animals, based on his solo dissent in the 2010 case of United States v. [read post]
14 Sep 2016, 8:00 am by Ilya Somin
He mentions the case of Oliver Wendell Holmes, who enjoys a great reputation despite, – among other things – authoring the Court’s notorious decision in Buck v. [read post]
7 Sep 2016, 2:22 pm by JB
  Even though Holmes made many bad decisions (including Buck v. [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 11:59 pm
Linda Luce (Judge Judith Rubenstein retiring).County Group 35 - Incumbent Wendell Graham v. [read post]