Search for: "BARNETT v. STATE"
Results 721 - 740
of 1,211
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 May 2012, 4:41 am
By Daniel RichardsonCity of Montpelier v. [read post]
24 May 2012, 6:33 am
At Reason, Jacob Sullum discusses the questions about the constitutionality of warrantless electronic surveillance left open by United States v. [read post]
22 May 2012, 1:45 am
Since Marbury v. [read post]
20 May 2012, 2:05 pm
(Randy Barnett) If the Supreme Court invalidates the individual insurance mandate, it need not call into question any other law that has ever been passed in the history of the United States. [read post]
13 May 2012, 10:34 am
Tuesday, May 15: United States v. [read post]
8 May 2012, 8:02 pm
United States v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 12:36 pm
Board of Education and Bolling v. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 6:19 am
Ilya Shapiro and Carl DeNigris of CATO@Liberty contend that in this week’s decision in United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 7:34 am
(Randy Barnett) I have been following the reaction to Judge Janice Rogers Brown and Chief Judge David Sentelle’s concurring opinion in Hettinga v. [read post]
11 Apr 2012, 12:47 pm
My response to that is to quote Justice Holmes in Lochner v. [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 8:13 am
Lopez and United States v. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 6:10 am
” Meanwhile, at the Volokh Conspiracy, Randy Barnett applauds the response to the President’s comments by the president of the American Bar Association. [read post]
8 Apr 2012, 10:18 am
The legitimacy of judicial review was settled more than 200 years ago in the landmark case Marbury v. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 3:38 pm
And in his first State of the Union address, President Obama chastised the court's decision allowing unlimited corporate spending in national elections. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 1:58 pm
United States, and City of Boerne v. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 8:47 am
The whole "limiting principle" -- or lack thereof -- is irrelevant to the states' economic power. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 6:30 pm
State v. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 7:07 am
Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, my colleague Randy Barnett, who's representing the private plaintiffs in the ACA case, has written a post focusing upon Justice Kennedy's expressed concern that in order for the Court to uphold section 5000A of the ACA, it might have to issue what Randy calls an "unbounded" opinion, one that would permit Congress to require the purchase of virtually any product--an outcome that Justice Kennedy fears would “change the relationship of… [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 12:31 am
The adjudication states: “The article under complaint was a feature on Gary Dobson and David Norris, who had recently been convicted of the murder of Stephen Lawrence. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 6:37 pm
Sutton’s opinion, meanwhile, rested on a dubious distinction between as-applied and facial challenges that would have required the Supreme Court to overrule United States v. [read post]
