Search for: "In Re Opinion of the Justices."
Results 481 - 500
of 14,121
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Nov 2023, 1:00 am
We all know this old saying, and in general, we’re ready to accept the occasional mishap or mistake. [read post]
9 Nov 2023, 11:39 am
Supreme Court provides further guidance through its opinions in Garnier and Lindke). [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 5:47 pm
But, on the whole, I probably think that Justice Streeter is right.It's a family law dispute, so a tiny bit of background is probably helpful. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 1:26 pm
For example, Justice Jackson said: “trademark is not about expression. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 12:45 pm
"When the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in his majority opinion in Bruen. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 11:04 am
You’ve then gone on to do all these things, including being the UN Special Rapporteur on Opinion and Expression. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 5:43 am
The Supreme Court was wrong -- by which I mean, the justices badly misinterpreted the Constitution's text -- in Roe; the Court was wrong to affirm (or, re-make) Roe in Casey; and the Court was right, in Dobbs, to jettison Roe and Casey as "grievously wrong" (as I and some co-authors argued here). [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
It's highly unlikely that whoever is assigned the opinion (my bet is the Chief keeps it for himself or perhaps assigns it to Justice Kavanaugh or Justice Barrett) will fully endorse the three principles that the SG articulated, but if the liberal Justices hold together and play nice with Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, they're more likely to get more of what they want.(4) At the core of what the SG seeks is an interpretation of Bruen in which… [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 3:15 am
When Prasad asked if judges could utilize AI systems to produce draft opinions, Rosenthal emphasized proper validation controls. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 2:20 pm
” A separate opinion from Gorsuch laying out that position would plant the kind of seed that would make the government wish it had never brought this case to the Supreme Court. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 9:04 am
It's surprisingly regulatory, while still trying to milk jawboning and public-private partnership for all they're worth. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 5:31 am
People’s votes are a far better bellwether of next year’s election than opinion polls a full year out. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 10:30 pm
In Breyer, the Court of Justice underlined that an IP address could be considered as personal data when combined with the additional information held by the internet service provider necessary to identify the data subject. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 10:52 pm
This includes sharing case specifics, personal opinions, or even innocent-seeming updates that might be misconstrued. 2. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 12:44 pm
But I didn’t hear ignorance; I heard Justices seeking to write an opinion reversing the Federal Circuit limited to TM law and asking for guidance on how to do so. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 6:00 am
Perhaps one or more Justices will give the question the attention it deserves in the written opinions, concurrences, and/or dissents. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
Capitol on January 6, 2021, is facing a campaign finance complaint alleging he illegally used cash from a failed re-election bid to attend the insurrection, including airfare and a hotel stay. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 9:57 am
” Because “you’re not talking about stopping the speech,” Sotomayor said, “[t]he question is, is this an infringement on speech? [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 5:30 am
Being a surprisingly emotional piece of EU jurisprudence, AG Emiliou’s opinion has the potential to re-traumatize. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 4:39 am
Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting in Boy Scouts v. [read post]
