Search for: "In Re Opinion of the Justices."
Results 641 - 660
of 14,245
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Mar 2023, 10:58 am
Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts offered hope to both sides. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 4:53 pm
Supreme Court Justice) In Re Houston Pipe Line Co, LP., No. 08-0800 (Tex. [read post]
28 Sep 2017, 6:11 am
The minimum standard here should be what Justice French wrote in her separate opinion in In Re B.M. when she was on the Tenth District Court of Appeals. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 2:39 pm
Speaking of Aaron Burr, Roberts did what he does best: talk less, smile more, don't let them know what you're against or what you're for. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 2:14 pm
They're not telling the Justices that people will disrespect them. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 11:44 am
(And I'm not going to even address the additional complexity of Judge Bea's dissent on this issue, or whether you're permitted to evaluate the dissent's reasoning in a case with no majority opinion that involves the issue of whether you're permitted to evaluate the dissent's reasoning in a case with no majority opinion.)Fear not. [read post]
28 Mar 2007, 3:04 pm
Needless to say, we're still waiting for the good stuff. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 3:17 pm
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito seemed equally unmoved by Stewart’s presentation. [read post]
17 May 2008, 5:30 pm
Texas Supreme Court Rules Against Doctor for the Second Time - No dissent by justices running for re-election. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 6:39 am
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 10-388; Justice Alito, joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia and Thomas filed this opinion respecting the denial of certiorari. [read post]
10 Apr 2010, 8:12 am
Here's Justice Stevens, in a concurring opinion, in Boerne v. [read post]
31 Aug 2016, 9:02 pm
But RLUIPA displaces the First Amendment.RLUIPA loads the deck against neutral, generally applicable land use laws by handing private religious entities the power to exact their attorney’s fees from the local government and by giving the Department of Justice the power to “investigate” and prosecute local governments for violating RLUIPA (regardless of evidence of discrimination). [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 11:01 am
Justice Gilbert says in the second paragraph of this opinion that "California Rules of Court, rule 9.7, pertaining to the oath required when an attorney is admitted to practice law, concludes with, “ ‘As an officer of the court, I will strive to conduct myself at all times with dignity, courtesy, and integrity. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 1:25 pm
Indeed, the Court of Appeal's opinion gives one a very bad impression of the trial judge -- Judge Deborah Chuang, in Orange County -- and (although Justice Rylaarsdam doesn't use this word) one might accurately describe the in camera hearing that she conducted as pretty much a cherade; or, more colloquially, a joke.I understand that that police officer might not want to tell anyone where he was standing at the time; that way, s/he can use this location again, and… [read post]
11 Sep 2023, 4:02 pm
Justice Baltodano's opinion earlier today says, in part:"Father failed to appear for his court-ordered deposition. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 11:44 pm
Justice Scalia wrote the majority opinion for 7 Justices. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 4:03 pm
Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in yesterday’s Inter Tribal Council case spoke primarily in a textualist idiom: it framed the case in terms of the purportedly simple question of how to read a very small number of words of statutory text; he even makes the obligatory citation to a convenient dictionary definition (of “accept”). [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 6:47 am
(I put "exalted" in quotes, because that's what Justice Scalia called it, in his dissenting opinion in Casey.) [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 3:31 pm
MARGARET WARNER: Well, for 26 years on the Supreme Court, Justice Antonin Scalia has long grounded his opinions in the words of the Constitution and the law. [read post]
25 Jan 2023, 6:30 am
The absence of the kind of disagreements we have become accustomed to see from the justices leaves one to wonder why the court did not simply write an opinion affirming the 9th Circuit. [read post]
