Search for: "Mazie" Results 381 - 400 of 778
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Dec 2017, 11:19 am by Wolfgang Demino
ONE MONTH INTO THE FIGHT OVER HEART AND SOUL NOT TO MENTION CONTROL OF THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAUDocket entry for 12/22 injunction hearing says "oral arguments heard. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 11:19 am by Wolfgang Demino
ONE MONTH INTO THE FIGHT OVER HEART AND SOUL NOT TO MENTION CONTROL OF THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU Docket entry for 12/22 injunction hearing says "oral arguments heard. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 4:25 am by Edith Roberts
Briefly: At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie notes that a study of “more than 3,000 hours of audio recordings of Supreme Court oral arguments between 1982 and 2014” suggests that “[t]he pitch of judges’ voices conveys more about their eventual votes than ‘legal, political and textual information. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 4:19 am by Edith Roberts
” Steven Mazie at The Economist’s Democracy in America blog agrees that “[b]eing perceived by the public as an honest broker unwedded to party or ideology is an increasingly elusive but fervent wish of many of the justices—particularly the chief. [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 4:19 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie suggests that this week’s orders allowing the latest version of the administration’s entry ban to go into full effect pending appeals “hinted that if Mr Trump’s travel ban reaches [the Supreme Court], a majority may be unreceptive to arguments it should be struck down as executive overreach or a violation of the constitution. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 4:21 am by Edith Roberts
Additional coverage comes from Mark Matthews for The Denver Post, Jess Bravin for The Wall Street Journal, Steven Mazie for The Economist’s Espresso blog, and Robert Barnes for The Washington Post, who reports that “[t]he case’s importance is underscored by the attention it has received: 100 amicus briefs have been filed and people began camping out Friday afternoon on the sidewalk in front of the Supreme Court to secure a spot” in the courtroom for the argument. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 4:08 am by Edith Roberts
For The Economist, Steven Mazie reports that at Wednesday’s oral argument in Carpenter v. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 4:17 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie “examines the religion question” in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 4:10 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie looks at Carpenter v. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 4:03 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist’s Espresso blog, Steven Mazie looks at Digital Realty Trust Inc. v. [read post]
26 Nov 2017, 7:25 pm by Francine Lipman
David Young (R- IA), plus 15 co-sponsors including Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Senators John Boozeman (R-AR), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Christopher Coons (D-DE)) on a tax credit to provide access to technology for blind individuals through refundable individual income tax credits (H.R. 1734 and S. 732) “The Access Technology Affordability Act. [read post]
25 Nov 2017, 5:32 am by SHG
” Economist legal writer Steven Mazie called this “calmly critiquing the content of one article. [read post]
22 Nov 2017, 4:03 am by Edith Roberts
” At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie suggests that the recent addition of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a former law clerk to Justice Anthony Kennedy, to President Donald Trump’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees may “be a pinky-promise golden parachute to … Kennedy,” but warns that if “Kennedy considers the fate of his judicial legacy on the Supreme Court, he may think twice,” because, “[l]ike Justice Gorsuch,… [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 4:11 am by Edith Roberts
At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie explains why “a wrinkle in the free-speech dispute may spell trouble for another part of the pro-life agenda if California ends up on the losing side” in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. [read post]