Search for: "Barrett"
Results 321 - 340
of 6,315
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Mar 2024, 12:51 pm
The per curiam opinion concluded that federal legislation is necessary to enforce Section 3's Disqualification Clause, yet even Barrett's concern-trolling concurrence argued that it was unnecessary to reach "the complicated question whether federal legislation is the exclusive vehicle through which Section 3 can be enforced," because the Court could have saved Trump's hide simply by ruling that Colorado could not disqualify him. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
Justice Barrett wrote separately to explain she only agreed with part of the majority per curiam opinion. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
Justice Barrett wrote separately to explain she only agreed with part of the majority per curiam opinion. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 6:20 am
Justice Barrett joined this part of the Court’s opinion, and the disaffected liberal justices wrote that allowing states to enforce Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment “would, we agree, create a chaotic state-by-state patchwork, at odds with our Nation’s federalism principles. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:49 am
On Monday, the Supreme Court surprised only the most optimistic of folks and reversed the Colorado Supreme Court's decision disqualifying Donald J. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 6:51 pm
” And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Josh Blackman and Seth Barrett Tillman have a post titled “If Trump Prevails, How Will Section 3 Be Litigated On Or After January 20, 2025? [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 6:28 pm
“In Trump Cases, Supreme Court Cannot Avoid Politics; The justices’ efforts to remain unified in cases affecting the election are fraying as the former president wins one case and is granted a delay in another”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this news analysis, along with an article headlined “Justice Amy Coney Barrett Stakes Out Distinctive Stance in Trump Case; The justice distanced herself from the majority, saying it had gone too far, and from the three… [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 1:51 pm
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman.] [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 8:13 am
Here are a few preliminary thoughts about the Court’s decision yesterday in Trump v. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 7:32 am
Joan Biskupic for CNN: Justice Amy Coney Barrett packed two very different messages into her one-page opinion on Monday as the Supreme Court declared states could not toss former President Donald Trump off the ballot. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 6:19 am
Justice Barrett does not strike me as that sensitive. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 4:00 am
Despite the insult, Justice Barrett tries to play peacemaker. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 3:21 am
How did a unanimous, per curiam, opinion, as concurrer Justice Amy Coney Barrett, turn up the heat? [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm
” In a short concurrence joined by Justice Barrett, Justice Alito stated that he understood the Court’s opinion only to reject a requirement of “animus,” rather than to “read intent out of” § 1514A entirely: “a discriminatory discharge that is made ‘because of’ a particular factor necessarily involves an intentional choice in which that factor plays some role in the employer’s thinking. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 8:24 pm
“Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with the majority over Trump, but admonished the liberals instead”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:43 pm
In my judgment, this is not the time to amplify disagreement with stridency,” Barrett wrote in her two-paragraph opinion. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 12:47 pm
(BARRETT, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment). [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 10:37 am
Court, Trump’s Lawyers Urge Cannon to Hold Trial After Election” by Devlin Barrett and Perry Stein (Washington Post) for MSN Illinois: “Civic Groups Call on Mayor, Aldermen to Enact City Council Ethics Reforms” by Jake Sheridan (Chicago Tribune) for MSN Virginia: “Virginia Senator Who Does Legal Work for Skill Game Industry Will Help Write Skill Game Bill” by Graham Moomaw for Virginia Mercury Legislative Issues… [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:51 am
While today's Supreme Court opinion is unanimous, it's notable that both Justice Amy Coney Barrett (writing for herself alone) and the three liberal justices (in a joint opinion) wrote concurrences that seem to reject or at least call into question much of the majority's reasoning. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:09 am
Barrett penned a one-page opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. [read post]
