Search for: "Michael Rosman"
Results 21 - 32
of 32
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2007, 8:00 pm
Michael Rosman has these comments on the majority opinion and Kennedy's concurrence and Hans Bader weighs in on the decision here. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 7:32 am
University of Texas at Austin with a post by Michael Rosman. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 3:55 pm
Indeed I sat at counsel table with Michael Rosman when he successfully argued that case. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 6:34 am
Alfred Mayer and the Uniqueness Of Race” –Michael Rosman, general counsel for the Center for Individual Rights “The Supreme Court, Race, and Political Representation” –Kenneth Mack, professor at Harvard Law School Post on Buchanan v. [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 2:30 pm
Michael Rosman and Michelle Scott (Center for Individual Rights) and M. [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 7:34 am
Rosman, Matthew D. [read post]
11 Jun 2025, 1:38 pm
I've known Michael Rosman at the Center for Individual Rights for 30 years; he has litigated many important cases, including with regard to racial preferences, and was one of the lawyers in Grutter v. [read post]
5 Mar 2022, 5:01 am
Michael Rosman (2022) then usefully explains and analyses the debate between Congress and a District Court over the applicability of Section 116 of the US Criminal Code to the Dawoodi Bohra case. [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 6:30 am
Tom Goldstein suggests that these alternatives, including drawing district lines with race in mind, are "per se constitutional," see here, while Michael Rosman seems to suggest that some of these alternatives could be subject to strict scrutiny under the Court's precedents, see here. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:27 am
” Michael Rosman suggested that race-neutral alternative jurisprudence “is hopelessly bollixed” and suggests that the Court “jettison it altogether. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 4:44 am
Gawon Bae and Michael Mitsanas report for CNN. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 9:02 pm
The report from Inspector General Michael Horowitz found the FBI had an “authorized purpose” when it initiated its investigation into the Trump campaign and rejected the assertion the case was opened out of political animus or that informants were used in violation of FBI rules. [read post]
