Search for: "Matter of Barrett"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,346
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2024, 12:28 pm
Barrett indicated that the court of appeals “presumably” can act “promptly. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 12:15 pm
Justice Barrett highlighted that the Fifth Circuit’s order allowing the law to go into effect was an “administrative stay” instead of a “stay pending appeal. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 4:58 am
Signup to receive the Early Edition in your inbox here. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 6:35 pm
[It will be harder for conservative litigants in blue states and liberal litigants in red states to obtain statewide relief. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 4:05 pm
Barrett v. [read post]
US Supreme Court rules public officials can be sued for blocking users on social media in some cases
16 Mar 2024, 11:28 am
The US Supreme Court ruled Friday that public officials can be sued for blocking users on social media if the official posts about state matters and is authorized to speak for the state. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 6:39 am
In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Barrett, the Supreme Court created a two step test, holding that that a public official’s social media conduct only qualifies as state action under §1983 if the official: possessed actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf on the particular matter at issue, and purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social media posts. [read post]
15 Mar 2024, 9:18 am
From Justice Barrett's unanimous opinion this morning in Lindke v. [read post]
15 Mar 2024, 8:42 am
” Barrett also cautioned that the “nature of the technology matters” when determining whether an official acted on behalf of the government: Although deleting comments allows an official to target only personal posts, blocking someone from a social media page that contains both personal and official posts could also prevent someone from commenting on official posts. [read post]
12 Mar 2024, 7:33 pm
“We don’t raise our voices no matter how hot-button the case is. [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 12:51 pm
Increases in the value of assets must be income, both as a definitional matter and as an anti-abuse rule, because treating such gains as anything other than income (and thus nontaxable) would encourage everyone who can do so -- read: rich people -- to take their incomes in that form rather than in cash. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
As a practical matter, it makes very little sense for states to add the sorts of burdens on presidential candidates. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
As a practical matter, it makes very little sense for states to add the sorts of burdens on presidential candidates. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 6:20 am
Now, however, they may deem their task merely to be declaring the existence of a controversy, no matter how flimsy. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:49 am
No matter, for Justice Thomas every day is a new day but some cluster of words from him explaining his inconsistent votes would have been helpful (no other member of the current Court was part of the term limits case). [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 1:51 pm
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman.] [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 8:13 am
” Not that it much matters now, but in fact that’s not a question the case raised. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 4:00 am
Despite the insult, Justice Barrett tries to play peacemaker. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 3:21 am
How did a unanimous, per curiam, opinion, as concurrer Justice Amy Coney Barrett, turn up the heat? [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 12:47 pm
(BARRETT, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment). [read post]
