Search for: "Marbury v. Marbury" Results 401 - 420 of 892
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 May 2009, 6:42 am
The political parties have known this from the start of the nation's history.Judicial Appointments Have Always Been "Political"Marbury v. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 6:55 am by Marissa Miller
Writing for the Huffington Post, Douglas McSwain contends that some of the Court’s most historic decisions, such as Marbury v. [read post]
7 Apr 2010, 2:54 pm by Gene Quinn
It has happened in exceptionally rare circumstances in the past, typically when there were enormous Constitutional implications, such as in Marbury v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 6:30 am by Gerard N. Magliocca
For instance, Lessig says that Chief Justice Marshall did the right thing in Marbury v. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 7:22 am by Patricia McConnico
Thomas Jefferson, to ask him what he thought of the effects of the Marbury v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 11:59 am by Parker Higgins
Of course, that position stands in conflict with Marbury v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 5:58 am by Marissa Miller
On the health care front, Michael Bobelian at Forbes analyzes the Chief Justice’s opinion and concludes that, although the Affordable Care Act “largely survived, the reasoning behind the decision represents a significant victory for conservative jurisprudence” – a “duality,” Bobelian suggests, that “resembles Marbury v. [read post]
17 Jan 2010, 10:09 am by Jon
As it was pointed out in Marbury v. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 3:33 pm by Gerard Magliocca
The repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801 (addressed indirectly by Marbury v. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 12:30 pm by Karen Tani
Throughout, the author examines many individual Supreme Court cases to illustrate points under discussion, ranging from Marbury v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 6:41 am by amy.burchfield@law.csuohio.edu
The lesson examines the concept of deference, its consistency with other legal principles (e.g., the Court’s landmark decision in Marbury v. [read post]
3 Dec 2008, 8:06 pm
David Schwartz discusses Monday’s argument in Kansas v. [read post]