Search for: "Wes Oliver"
Results 2781 - 2800
of 3,265
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Sep 2023, 7:16 am
Supreme Court has alluded to the market for ideas in First Amendment law for more than a century, dating back at least to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes dissent in Abrams v. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 1:53 pm
We suggest giving Toxipure the time of the day! [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 7:36 am
And as we see the cost of computing power come down, as we see more and more legal information becoming digitized. [read post]
6 Aug 2018, 11:43 am
” No More Cardozos But will we ever see a Cardozo again? [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 8:42 am
Holmes wrote: We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. [read post]
4 Oct 2015, 11:24 pm
We published a comment from Lorna Woods. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 2:27 pm
Last week, we brought you Scenes from the Breadline, in the form of my very own photo essay on unemployment. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 1:20 pm
The program tells us this represents the Older Billy, and the performer is actually a solo dancer with the New York City Ballet, so we are seeing the real thing. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 9:41 am
Whilst it is helpful to have these snippets (which may represent the entire gist of the judgment) it is a shame we aren’t apparently going to get the whole thing so we can assess that for ourselves. [read post]
23 Sep 2024, 9:01 pm
As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once put it, it won’t do to say, “the major premise of the conclusion expressed in a statute, the change of policy that induces the enactment, may not be set out in terms, but it is an inadequate discharge of duty for courts to say: we see what you are driving at, but you have not said it, and therefore we shall go on as before. [read post]
24 Mar 2007, 11:12 am
We'd like our law to be moral, but that wish doesn't make law and morality coextensive. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 8:52 am
We are generally in favor of free speech when we like the speech for which protection is sought but lose interest in it when we do not. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:37 am
Horner comes out, in which the Supreme Court sort of says, hey, we might have had a little bit of a buzz on when we came up with that Colon stuff, so maybe you should forget that whole thing… So there you are: you have an opinion from a court of appeals saying that you have to retry the case because the indictment was wrong, but you’ve got a later opinion from the Supreme Court saying that the indictment isn’t wrong. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 11:05 pm
Remember "We'll be welcomed as liberators"? [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 4:07 am
We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up. [read post]
4 May 2015, 1:36 pm
Above all, we expect our judges to be honest, unbiased, and fair. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 1:30 pm
All that we can do is wait and see what it is. [read post]
9 Jun 2020, 9:01 pm
One hopes but cannot be sure that we are not witnessing a case of plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.A truly bold package of reforms would address institutional racism in all its forms, but even focusing narrowly on criminal justice, we can readily identify an emerging consensus for such measures as community policing, civilian review boards, demilitarization of police tactics, bail reform, an end to mass incarceration, and more. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 9:41 am
Whilst it is helpful to have these snippets (which may represent the entire gist of the judgment) it is a shame we aren’t apparently going to get the whole thing so we can assess that for ourselves. [read post]
21 Jun 2015, 6:18 pm
We don’t have the crime rates that America does, either now or in the 70s. [read post]
