Search for: "Marty Lederman"
Results 581 - 600
of 806
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jan 2009, 7:27 am
"Marty Lederman joins the Office of Legal Counsel": Jack Balkin has this post today at "Balkinization. [read post]
20 Jan 2009, 6:07 am
MARTY LEDERMAN AND DAVID BARRON to the Office of Legal Counsel. [read post]
20 Jan 2009, 6:01 am
Jack Balkin reports that Marty Lederman and David Barron have joined the Office of Legal Counsel as Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General respectively. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 11:38 pm
Marty Lederman, known to many as one of the most insightful legal bloggers on the ‘net, will begin work immediately in the Office of Legal Council in the Obama administration. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 6:27 pm
From Ben Smith: A Georgetown source forwards over an email from that school's administration, reporting that Professor Marty Lederman's class will be canceled -- because he's joining the Obama administration. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 5:35 pm
Some of you may have noticed that Marty Lederman has not been blogging recently at Balkinization. [read post]
10 Dec 2008, 9:02 pm
There, in a comment on a post by Nate Oman, Marty Lederman writes that in the "adult enterprise" on which students will embark after law school, they will usually use first names, not last names, except in court. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 11:20 am
When liberals and conservatives agree on something, it deserves serious consideration: Marty Lederman to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 2:51 am
TALK OF MARTY LEDERMAN as head of OLC. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 9:39 pm
I've worked with Marty on a few Supreme Court briefs. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 6:49 pm
***e) Unrelatedly, once again, others have beaten me to the punch in thinking that Marty Lederman is the ideal candidate to head the OLC. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 6:11 pm
... [read post]
25 Oct 2008, 11:06 am
The opinion was described by Neil Kinkopf, now a profesor of law at Georga State University, who was in the OLC (with Marty Lederman) during the Clinton Administration, as another example of the Administration "run[ning] amok" on its notion of executive power. [read post]
21 Oct 2008, 10:02 am
Today it joins IntLawGrrls' other favorite sites in the "connections" list at right.Contributors, all affiliated with Georgetown, are: Nadia Asancheyev, Tim Bass, David Cole, Justin Florence, Matthew Gerke, Neal Katyal, David Koplow , Marty Lederman (prior IntLawGrrls post), David Luban (prior post), and Annamartine Salick.Heartfelt welcome! [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 6:10 pm
Over at Balkinization, Marty Lederman has a post arguing that the recently-discovered monitoring of satellite phones in the Middle East violated the Fourth Amendment:... [read post]
20 Sep 2008, 3:02 pm
Returning to an earlier post, and a criticism leveled by Marty Lederman, it remains totally unclear whether the Professor and the Banker have "transgressed" any laws, and I am willing to believe that the answer, as Marty has suggested, is no inasmuch as certain New Deal legislation can be interpreted as sufficient delegation to justify the Administration's (and the Fed's) actions. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 3:08 pm
Writing at Balkinization, Georgetown prof Marty Lederman finds authority in the Federal Reserve Act of 1932, section 13(3) which provides that “in unusual and exigent circumstances” the Fed may authorize any federal reserve bank to discount notes without limit. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 4:21 am
See Eric Posner ("I suspect the deal is a loan in form but a purchase in substance") at The Volkoh Conspiracy, Carolyn Elefant at Legal Blog Watch, David Zaring at The Conglomerate and Marty Lederman at Balkanization. [read post]
8 Sep 2008, 4:26 pm
(This, of course, is the subject of David Barron's and Marty Lederman's book-length articles in The Harvard Law Review, "The Commander in Chief at the Lowest Ebb," 121 Harv. [read post]
2 Aug 2008, 11:01 pm
As Marty Lederman notes, Bates held, in an "an extraordinarily thorough, scholarly and thoughtful opinion," that "there is no basis for the DOJ argument that close presidential advisers are absolutely immune from compelled congressional testimony. [read post]
