Search for: "Application of Barrett"
Results 281 - 300
of 993
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2022, 2:31 pm
(Sam Bray wrote about the application here.) [read post]
23 Jul 2022, 4:05 am
Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the majority. [read post]
12 Jul 2022, 10:53 pm
For what it's worth, Boechler was a Barrett opinion that quoted from Garner's Modern English Usage. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
The Court presented PennEast as a watershed, breaking with the previous narrow application of structural waiver to bankruptcy powers only in Katz and establishing a definitive test for when structural waiver is applicable. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 4:00 am
The most straightforward application of originalism would then say that the Fourteenth Amendment provides greater protection for free speech when infringed by state or local government than the First Amendment provides for it when infringed by the federal government. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 11:18 pm
S. ___, ___ (2021) (slip op., at 1) (BARRETT, J., concurring in denial of application for injunctive relief ). [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
Before MPP, full hearings often took years, especially if the government had released an applicant under the government’s “parole” authority in 8 U.S.C. [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 7:02 am
Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997), it remains applicable to the federal government, see, e.g., Burwell v. [read post]
5 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Barrett, the Court held they cannot. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 4:18 pm
Several Justices have the circuits on which they hard served: Roberts (D.C.), Sotomayor (2d), Alito (3d), Barrett (7th), Gorsuch (10th). [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 3:44 pm
Thomas indicated that he would grant review to resolve what he characterized as the “considerable confusion over whether a mandate, like New York’s, that does not exempt religious conduct can ever be neutral and generally applicable,” and therefore less likely to violate the Constitution’s free exercise clause, “if it exempts secular conduct that similarly frustrates the specific interest that the mandate serves. [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 6:05 am
Justice Barrett dissented in an opinion joined by Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch. [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
Justice Thomas writes for himself and Justices Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 9:01 pm
(State laws on any subject must comply with federal constitutional principles that have been deemed applicable to the states.) [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 7:15 am
’” The court ruled for the doctors, with Breyer writing for six justices, and Justice Samuel Alito concurring in the judgment on behalf of himself, Justice Clarence Thomas and, in part, Justice Amy Coney Barrett. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 5:58 am
The Court also concluded that even though NMFS itself had not explicitly discussed the applicable Fourth Amendment standard, it had adequately addressed commenters “Fourth Amendment” objection to the regulation. [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 5:56 pm
Justice Alito concurred with the court’s opinion joined by Justice Thomas partially joined by Justice Barrett. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:10 pm
Petitioners then sued respondents—state officials who oversee the processing of licensing applications—for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that respondents violated their Second andFourteenth Amendment rights by denying their unrestricted-license applications for failure to demonstrate a unique need for self-defense. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:10 pm
Petitioners then sued respondents—state officials who oversee the processing of licensing applications—for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that respondents violated their Second andFourteenth Amendment rights by denying their unrestricted-license applications for failure to demonstrate a unique need for self-defense. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 12:27 pm
Here is my very tentative summary of what appears to me on first read, based on Justice Thomas's majority opinion (joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett) plus a bit from Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence, joined by Chief Justice Roberts: [1.] [read post]
