Search for: "Howard Wasserman"
Results 481 - 500
of 547
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2017, 3:43 am
Other comments on the argument in Hernández come in two posts at Prawsfblawg from Howard Wasserman, here and here. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 4:28 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman looks at one of next week’s cases, Hall v. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 4:11 am
” Additional commentary comes from Michael Dorf at his eponymous blog, Robert George in an op-ed for The New York Times, the editorial board of The Washington Post, Rick Hills at PrawfsBlawg, Ian Millhiser at ThinkProgress, Jennifer Rubin in an op-ed for The Washington Post, Erica Goldberg at PrawfsBlawg, Jennifer Finney Boylan in an op-ed for The New York Times, Noah Feldman in an op-ed for Bloomberg, Lisa Keen at Keen News Service, Michael Farris at National Review, Mark Joseph Stern at… [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 4:06 am
Howard Wasserman has this blog’s analysis of Monday’s argument in Nieves v. [read post]
16 Apr 2008, 10:32 am
., 248 N.Y. 339 (N.Y. 1928) Nominated by Howard Wasserman Seconded by Alan Childress Text of the opinion Wikipedia article In probably the most famous case in torts, and perhaps in all of American legal education, railroad passenger Mrs. [read post]
1 Jun 2007, 9:22 am
A sober legal analysis of the claims comes from Howard Wasserman at the Sports Law Blog (via TortsProf) and a snarky analysis from David Nieporent at Overlawyered;As we get ready for trial, we always wonder about juries and jury selection. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 4:09 am
Howard Wasserman has this blog’s argument analysis. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 4:43 am
Still more commentary comes from Kenneth Jost at Jost on Justice; from Adam Winkler at the Huffington Post; at PrawfsBlawg, where posts come from Richard Re, Howard Wasserman (who has four posts on the decision and how it is being implemented), Paul Horwitz, Rick Hills, and Hadar Aviram; from Karl Laird at the Oxford Human Rights Hub; at the Human Rights at Home Blog from Noah Novogrodsky; and from John Culhane for POLITICO. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman ponders some process-oriented questions raised by Vance and Mazars and discusses potential implications for future cases. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 4:23 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman takes issue with liberal complaints about Republican court-packing. [read post]
19 Jun 2015, 5:12 am
” Howard Wasserman analyzes both Reed and Walker at PrawfsBlawg. [read post]
11 Jan 2017, 4:25 am
Howard Wasserman analyzes the argument for this blog. [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 5:01 am
In the immediate aftermath of the decision, Howard Wasserman argued that the Court's position was the best approach in light of the Court's efforts to tighten the definition of jurisdiction in recent years. [read post]
21 May 2010, 7:19 am
” Howard Wasserman responds to Fontana’s article on PrawfsBlawg, saying “[t]he whole piece is worth a read” but that he is unconvinced by Fontana’s description of a lack of eligible liberals to serve as federal judges. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 4:15 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman remarks that “[t]he opinions seemed to look at different facts triggering different analyses. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 6:05 am
United States, where a defendant was convicted of violating Sarbanes-Oxley’s ‘anti-shredding’ prohibition by throwing illegally caught fish off his boat”; Ruthann Robson at Constitutional Law Prof Blog, who summarizes the case as one in which, “[i]n a nutshell, the Court concludes that the federal prosecutors exceeded the power the statute gave them . . . and thus there is no need to decide whether Congress exceeded the power the Constitution’s treaty and… [read post]
29 May 2018, 4:13 am
” Howard Wasserman shares his impressions of “RBG,” the new documentary about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at PrawfsBlawg. [read post]
15 Jun 2018, 4:30 am
” Additional commentary comes from the First Amendment Blog, Jennifer Tiedemann at the Goldwater Institute, Adav Noti at Take Care, Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, and Richard Hasen at Slate, who concludes that “the opinion shows a more realistic and functional understanding of the political process than the court has shown in campaign finance cases. [read post]
5 May 2020, 3:54 am
” Additional commentary comes from Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, who remarks that “[t]he big difference” from in-person arguments “is that the Justices were less the stars,” Josh Blackman at Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy blog (via How Appealing), Elie Mystal at The Nation, and the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, which observes that the unprecedented teleconference format offered “a great chance for the public to witness the… [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 6:54 am
Writing at PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman considers the opinion’s discussion of issues of jurisdiction versus issues of substantive law, while Andy Spalding predicts that, after Kiobel, “the next generation of ATS litigation . . . will likely focus to a large extent on the territorial nexus question. [read post]
