Search for: "Kennedy v. State"
Results 3441 - 3460
of 8,224
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Mar 2015, 4:16 pm
John Catt has indicated that he will take the case to the European Court of Human Rights – historically the court has been far stricter on the requirement of accordance with the law and therefore far less willing to allow the state wide discretionary powers where privacy and surveillance are concerned, resulting in a series of rulings against the UK – see Malone v UK (1984), Hewitt v UK (1992), Liberty & Others v UK (2008), S &… [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 3:31 pm
Much attention has been directed at the coercion issue as presented by Justice Kennedy at oral argument. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 2:56 pm
(Not to be outdone, we offer our own highly analytical prediction about the likely votes of the Chief Justice and Anthony Kennedy.) [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 11:52 am
In the wake of the oral argument in King v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 11:14 am
Timothy Jost Yesterday's Supreme Court argument in King v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 11:10 am
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, 2013file photo) As I noted on Wednesday, Justice Anthony Kennedy expressed little sympathy for the federal government’s textual arguments in King v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 9:18 am
This week’s oral argument in King v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 9:11 am
The plaintiffs in the King v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 7:14 am
For all the textual parsing back and forth at oral argument yesterday in King v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 8:28 pm
In Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt addresses the federalism concerns raised by Justice Kennedy at oral argument in King v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 8:28 pm
In New York v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 3:32 pm
From questioning today in King v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 2:48 pm
When King v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 1:50 pm
After nearly ninety minutes of oral arguments today in King v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 12:29 pm
But Kennedy was only talking about conditions that are so dire that they are understood as requirements (that is, the feds have made the states an offer they can't refuse).5. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 10:43 am
Kennedy, who seemed decidedly more sympathetic to the government than might have been expected, worried over a constitutional blow against the states. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 8:47 am
Trained constitutional lawyers will find it noteworthy that his focus here is on the consequence for states as such, and not for their citizens; Kennedy’s concern is about the federal/state balance and his distrust of a reading that puts a gun to the head of states that fail to set up their own exchanges – threatening them with the almost certain destruction of their statewide insurance systems if they do not comply. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 8:42 am
[Justice Kennedy]... pointed out that, under petitioners’ reading, the federal government would be all but forcing states to create their own exchanges.... not just [because otherwise] their citizens would be denied benefits... [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 7:42 am
First update: Liberals lead line in questioning of Petitioner in King, but Kennedy asks important question about disrupting federal state balance. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 7:16 am
The opinion is much more harmful now to the states than when it was decided; Justice Kennedy reports mail-order commerce of $180 million at the time of Quill (1992 – a few years before internet commerce), compared to more than three trillion dollars in 2008. [read post]
