Search for: "Application of Barrett"
Results 501 - 520
of 1,019
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2021, 9:05 pm
The City’s antidiscrimination policies, therefore, did not constitute “generally applicable law. [read post]
20 Jun 2021, 9:00 am
Again, it was obvious that conservatives would dislike some liberal judges' application of a presumptive religious exemption regime, just as it's inevitable that liberals would dislike some conservative judges' application of such a regime. [read post]
19 Jun 2021, 3:37 pm
” Barrett notes that the court has used a “more nuanced” approach than strict scrutiny when generally applicable laws affect speech or assembly. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 10:12 pm
" In an instance, I recognized that Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh were unwilling to use strict scrutiny to review burdens on the free exercise of religion that are neutral and generally applicable. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 1:37 pm
” Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, similarly left open the possibility of reconsidering Smith in the future. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 1:20 pm
Ten weeks ago, acting on an emergency application for injunctive relief in the COVID-19 case of Tandon v. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 5:10 am
But Roberts said the city’s policy fell outside of Smith because it was not generally applicable. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 4:30 am
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Clarence Thomas. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 9:01 pm
Justice Barrett concurred, joined by Kavanaugh and Breyer. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 4:18 pm
Roberts wrote a concurrence in judgment that reflected his ultimate majority opinion: the law is not generally applicable because of the exemptions. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 1:35 pm
SCOTUS decided, in a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Barrett, and joined by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, that the narrower reading is the correct one. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 10:36 am
General allegations about corporate decision-making in the United States cannot, without more, establish a domestic application of the the statute. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 10:04 am
Barrett wrote a concurring opinion that Kavanaugh joined in full and Breyer joined except for the first paragraph. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 8:36 am
The prevailing assumption seems to be that strict scrutiny would apply whenever a neutral and generally applicable law burdens religious exercise. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 8:11 am
But he agrees with Justices Barrett's and Kavanaugh's skepticism of categorical strict scrutiny here. [3.] [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 8:06 am
To plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the ATS, plaintiffs must allege more domestic conduct than general corporate activity. [read post]
15 Jun 2021, 7:36 am
Courts have struggled to answer these questions, leaving us with a doctrine that is most uncertain in its scope and application. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 9:40 am
” The case against Harvard, filed in November 2014, contends that the university violates the federal Civil Rights Act by discriminating against Asian American applicants, but both the district court and the U.S. [read post]
11 Jun 2021, 9:53 am
Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett correctly, in our view, struck down the “broad” view of the CFAA in a 6-3 vote. [read post]
10 Jun 2021, 4:43 pm
” Justice Barrett, writing for the majority, agreed with the parties that Van Buren was entitled to obtain the information he had accessed and was authorized to retrieve information about the license plate number. [read post]
