Search for: "Mark A. Graber"
Results 361 - 380
of 449
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2010, 4:16 am
The panel includes moderator Mark Graber (Maryland), Mitchell Berman (Texas), Chad Oldfather (Marquette), Aaron Zelinksy (recent Yale grad and occasional guest blogger here), and me.It should be a great discussion and I hope any early-risers will stop by. [read post]
25 May 2010, 5:49 pm
The panel includes moderator Mark Graber (Maryland), Mitchell Berman (Texas), Chad Oldfather (Marquette, former Guest Prawf), Aaron Zelinksy (recent Yale grad and likely future prawf), and me. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 5:00 am
The panel consists of Mark Graber (Maryland), Neil Siegel (Duke), Mitch Berman (Texas), Aaron Zelinksky (about to graduate Yale), journalist Bruce Weber, and myself. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 4:00 am
Graber; articles by David Gray, Lief H. [read post]
31 Jan 2010, 4:29 pm
IntroductionThe counter-majoritarian difficulty may be the best known problem in constitutional theory. [read post]
20 Jan 2010, 8:00 pm
Chicago Mark Graber (Maryland). [read post]
25 Dec 2009, 10:24 am
” Id. at 1106 (Graber, J., concurring). [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 9:00 pm
The Daily Record (partially mis-)quoted me as follows: University of Maryland School of Law professor Mark Graber ... compared Baltimore's bill to the requirement that tobacco companies put health warnings on cigarette packages. [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 5:46 am
Referencing Justice Sotomayor's oft-discussed "wise Latina" comment, Mark Graber at Balkinization explores a bit of legal theory and hypothesizes about the true meaning of a justice's so-called subjectivity. [read post]
26 Sep 2009, 2:09 am
As Mark Graber has argued persuasively, such splits in the governing coalition create yet further space for the justices to go ahead and rule as they would like. [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 12:01 am
Like the marks at issue in Brookfield and Quiksilver, the Rounded O’ mark and the Angular O’ mark differ in several material respects. [read post]
28 Jun 2009, 6:29 am
And, of course, there is Mark Graber's magnificent book on Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 11:17 am
Put to one side that the Constitution has not "endured for 220 years," unless one recognizes, as Joyce Appleby once put it, that it was "in the shop" over a decade in the 1860s, not least because the bad brakes and slick tires built into the original 1787 Constitution in fact helped drive us over a cliff, as Mark Graber has demonstrated in his magnificent book on Dred Scott. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 8:29 am
(Mark Graber, incidentally, has written a witty though (to me) ultimately unconvincing critique of my "bad brakes" metaphor, in which he argues, altogether correctly, I concede, that it is often rational to keep driving what you know to be a defective car rather than paying an enormous price for a car (or for repairs) that will inevitably generate its own risks.) [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:36 am
Here is the abstract:This essay synthesizes recent writing on the constitutional history of slavery, featuring Mark Graber's Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (2006). [read post]
4 Jun 2009, 1:34 am
Here's the abstract:This essay synthesizes recent writing on the constitutional history of slavery, featuring Mark Graber's Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (2006). [read post]
29 May 2009, 12:55 pm
There's a short debate about it in the LA Times between Ilya Somin and Erwin Chemerinsky, and some interesting posts on the subject from Orin Kerr and Ilya Somin at The Volokh Conspiracy, and from Mark Graber and Susan Bandes at Balkinization (and I'm sure many others I haven't read). [read post]
25 May 2009, 11:19 am
So, as Mark Graber asks, who could be against empathy? [read post]
25 May 2009, 2:48 am
Empathy, so understood, is a basic and necessary tool for making sense of the intentions and actions of others.So, as Mark Graber asks, who could be against empathy? [read post]
11 Apr 2009, 3:23 am
Mark Graber begins his book with the observation that legal scholars almost universally proclaim that the Dred Scott decision was wrong. [read post]
