Search for: "David A. Kennedy"
Results 701 - 720
of 2,861
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2009, 9:35 am
Kennedy Blvd. [read post]
18 Jul 2009, 8:00 am
Kennedy Blvd. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 8:44 am
Kennedy, February 03, 1988, 97-0 Justice Antonin Scalia, September 17, 1986, 98-0 Justice John Paul Stevens, December 17, 1975, 98-0 [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 8:54 am
Kennedy Blvd. [read post]
22 Jan 2012, 4:00 pm
On Wednesday, Carlos Vazquez will respond to David L. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 11:42 pm
For reasons well articulated by Randall Kennedy, I reject any such notion. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 4:52 am
(David Bernstein) It hasn’t changed since I wrote the following almost a year ago: What the opponents of the individual mandate had to do was provide plausible arguments that the individual mandate is distinguishable from precedents like Wickard v. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 9:01 pm
Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. [read post]
14 Jun 2018, 9:01 pm
At their best, Justice Kennedy’s writings rise above technical legal doctrine. [read post]
8 May 2014, 9:01 pm
As Justice Scalia pointedly observed, Justice Kennedy’s recharacterization of Seattle has serious problems: [Justice Kennedy’s opinion] reinterprets [Seattle] beyond recognition. . . . [read post]
8 Nov 2009, 12:04 pm
David A. [read post]
8 May 2009, 3:47 pm
New Mexico Civil Rights Law is written by Joseph Kennedy and Shannon Kennedy of The Kennedy Law Firm. [read post]
28 May 2010, 3:15 pm
This case was originally summarized by Kim Yee and edited by David Pilley of Harper Grey LLP. [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 10:05 am
On what number ballot did Kennedy secure the nomination? [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 1:04 pm
David M. [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 9:50 am
Breyer and David H. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 2:33 am
Kennedy on November 22, 1963 brought renewed attention to these questions. [read post]
19 Nov 2018, 7:35 am
Although the Supreme Court did indeed declare back in 2003 that the recidivism risk for sex offenders is "frightening and high" - "estimated to be as high as 80%," in Justice Kennedy's words - that turns out (as Ira and Tara Ellman have convincingly demonstrated here) to have been based upon no actual evidence whatsoever, having been derived from a single, unsupported, and entirely uncorroborated sentence in a 1986 article in Psychology Today. [read post]
19 Nov 2018, 7:35 am
Although the Supreme Court did indeed declare back in 2003 that the recidivism risk for sex offenders is "frightening and high" - "estimated to be as high as 80%," in Justice Kennedy's words - that turns out (as Ira and Tara Ellman have convincingly demonstrated here) to have been based upon no actual evidence whatsoever, having been derived from a single, unsupported, and entirely uncorroborated sentence in a 1986 article in Psychology Today. [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 2:14 pm
David G. [read post]
