Search for: "SMITH v BARRETT"
Results 21 - 40
of 223
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jun 2021, 3:19 pm
She wrote that history did not justify overruling Smith, but text and structure might. [read post]
16 May 2024, 7:09 am
Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Smith v. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 11:54 am
Third, we got an early glimpse of how Justice Barrett views stare decisis, Smith, and Sherbert. [read post]
19 Sep 2021, 2:44 pm
The Court would have granted review in Small v. [read post]
26 Mar 2022, 3:38 pm
Recall that Kavanaugh, along with Justice Barrett, declined to overrule Employment Division v. [read post]
1 Jul 2021, 2:09 pm
Justice Barrett wrote: Yet what should replace Smith? [read post]
27 May 2024, 9:12 pm
I believe that the Supreme Court will decide Smith v. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 8:22 am
Senate Judiciary Committee members pressed Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on whether the landmark abortion decision, Roe v. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 4:22 am
Barrette, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 392 [St. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 12:20 pm
Smith are being honored for their work in Care Court. [read post]
30 Mar 2023, 10:26 pm
Pavan v. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 8:36 am
Supreme Court today in Fulton v. [read post]
29 Oct 2022, 5:57 am
The focus of the letter is the fact that Barrett voted with the majority in the Dobbs decision to overturn Roe v. [read post]
16 Feb 2021, 9:01 pm
Fulton v. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 10:12 pm
Perhaps Justice Barrett would replace Smith with something akin to the time-place-manner framework. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 11:56 am
Smith, D'Alonzo v. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 4:26 am
Smith—a 2017 Supreme Court case in which the Court also sided with the same-sex parents. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 6:39 am
” Justice Barrett, remember, clerked for Justice Scalia, author of the watershed confrontation clause case, Crawford v. [read post]
20 Aug 2014, 11:27 am
My students Nate Barrett, Charles Linehan, and Michael Smith worked on it, and New Jersey lawyer Daniel Schmutter of Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis LLP was kind enough to agree to be pro bono local counsel — many thanks to him for that! [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 1:20 pm
Smith, a landmark 1990 decision holding that the free exercise clause does not provide a right to religious exemptions from neutral and generally applicable laws, or (2) sharply limit the impact of Smith by turning a caveat the Smith majority used to distinguish a prior case — the “mechanism for individualized exemptions” reading of Sherbert v. [read post]
