Search for: "Kennedy Thomas"
Results 3621 - 3640
of 4,886
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2010, 12:36 pm
But in the opinion, Scalia was able to carry with him only Justices Thomas and Kennedy. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 11:17 am
National Australia Bank Ltd (.Download Morrison), the majority opinion (written by Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito) affirmed the lower courts and held that Section 10(b) of the 34 Act does not provide a cause... [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 10:33 am
Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy would have found the statute unconstitutional. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 10:30 am
But Scalia (along with Thomas and Kennedy) adopted the position of the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, and wrote that the statute should be thrown out altogether. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 10:01 am
Scalia, joined by Thomas and Kennedy, said the Court should not have rewritten the statute, but should have found it unconstitutionally vague. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 9:06 am
The vote is unanimous on the “honest services” question in this case, but three Justices would have ruled that the honest services statute is unconstitutional: Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 8:49 am
Justice Scalia wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kennedy, Thomas and Alito. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 8:15 am
Justice Kennedy, joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Ginsburg and Alito, dissented. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 8:01 am
The vote is unanimous on the “honest services” question in this case, but three Justices would have ruled that the honest services statute is unconstitutional: Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 7:33 am
Justice Kennedy dissents joined by CJ Roberts and Justices Ginsburg and Alito. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 7:31 am
Justice Kennedy dissented, joined by the Chief Justice, Justice Alito, and Justice GInsburg. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 7:30 am
Scalia (joined by Thomas) and Kennedy concur, and would hold Section 1346 unconstitutionally vague. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 4:00 am
Justice Anthony Kennedy supported the group's position 67 percent of the time and the other three conservatives, chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, were between Alito and Kennedy.More on that here.Wait a second -- 100 percent in close cases? [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 2:40 pm
A four-Justice plurality – the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito — emphatically endorsed the idea that the Takings Clause applies to all three branches of government. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 8:30 am
Thomas Fisher, Chicago, IL. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 9:00 pm
Dear Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito: My office is just a few miles up the street from yours. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 12:53 pm
His lengthy opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Thomas and Alito, makes short work of the Florida matter, but goes on to challenge, point by point, the reservations expressed in the two concurring opinions. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 11:56 am
Apfel, Scalia and Thomas both endorsed the notion that the retroactive imposition of monetary liability violates the takings clause. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 9:31 am
Roberts (joined by Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito): First, the lawsuit is justiciable (as one might hope after 12 years of litigation)” as a preenforcement review of a criminal statute that presents “a credible threat of prosecution. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 5:57 am
Justice Alito wrote the opinion for the Court, which was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor. [read post]
