Search for: "Adam Feldman" Results 401 - 420 of 815
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jan 2018, 7:14 am by Andrew Hamm
In the latest episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, Elizabeth Slattery and Tiffany Bates talk with Adam Feldman, the founder of Empirical SCOTUS, and play “Judge or Just Made Up” – “can you spot the fake judges? [read post]
26 Jan 2018, 4:00 am by Matthew Waxman
I do, however, think Feldman’s book helps to debunk some common myths that congressionalists often deploy. [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 4:00 am by Matthew Waxman
Moreover, Adams was actually struggling to avoid open conflict with France, not baiting the nation into one. [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 3:55 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman examines the Supreme Court’s “practice of inviting amici to brief and argue cases,” noting that “[s]uch opportunities helped promote several illustrious attorneys’ careers. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 10:48 am
"The Invitation List": Adam Feldman has this post at his "Empirical SCOTUS" blog. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 5:08 am by Jonathan H. Adler
As I noted here, Adam Feldman's research indicates the Court was issuing opinions at its slowest pace in over 100 years. [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 3:46 am by Edith Roberts
” At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman analyzes the “friend of the court” filings in merits cases so far this term, concluding that “[e]ven as the Court takes fewer cases each term, a regular group of amici, each with strong interests, files briefs in multiple cases,” and the “authors of these briefs tend to be Supreme Court repeat players with extensive amicus experience. [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 1:55 pm
" Adam Feldman has this post at his "Empirical SCOTUS" blog. [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 6:49 am by Jonathan H. Adler
According to data compiled by Adam Feldman at Empirical SCOTUS, the last time the Supreme Court did not issue a second opinion in an argued case until January was 1869. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 4:28 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman notes that “in some ways the Court’s output so far this year is at a historic low” and “flesh[es] out this low output by putting it into a historic context to show that … this rate of output should be expected from the justices as the Court has cut its workload substantially in recent decades. [read post]
9 Jan 2018, 1:30 pm
"Looking Back to Make Sense of the Court's (Relatively) Light Workload": Adam Feldman has this post at his "Empirical SCOTUS" blog. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 4:20 am by Edith Roberts
” At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman “examines the justices’ and attorneys’ applications of textualism in oral arguments and in opinions to chart the Court’s recent trajectory of this interpretive theory and to forecast whether we can expect Justice Scalia’s textualist legacy to live on. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 2:56 pm
"A New Era in SCOTUS Textualism": Adam Feldman has this post at his "Empirical SCOTUS" blog. [read post]
26 Dec 2017, 4:26 am by Edith Roberts
At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman analyzes the oral-argument engagement of the justices and advocates so far this term, remarking on the “potential strategic nature” of Justice Neil Gorsuch’s participation. [read post]
25 Dec 2017, 6:10 pm
"Something to Talk About": Adam Feldman has this post at his "Empirical SCOTUS" blog. [read post]
23 Dec 2017, 5:15 pm by Alex Potcovaru
Michael Adams and Megan Reiss considered how international law should address these types of attacks. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 4:25 am by Edith Roberts
” At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman analyzes oral-argument transcripts to conclude that “Justice [Neil] Gorsuch may ask attorneys to ‘help’ him on a more frequent basis than any prior justice in the history of the Court. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 12:45 pm
"Help a Justice Out": Adam Feldman has this post at his "Empirical SCOTUS" blog. [read post]
18 Dec 2017, 3:54 am by Edith Roberts
” At Empirical SCOTUS, Adam Feldman uses text analysis of the argument in Masterpiece Cakeshop as he “attempts to discern (at least speculative) case outcome(s) from what the justices said. [read post]