Search for: "State v Sullivan" Results 721 - 740 of 2,736
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Mar 2019, 5:08 pm by INFORRM
United States The Cyberlaw Clinic reports that it has filed an amicus curiae brief (.pdf) in the United States Supreme Court in Oracle v. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 8:53 am by Sarah Grant
Oral Argument Chief Judge Robert Katzmann and Judges Christopher Droney and Richard Sullivan heard the case. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Vestal, Religious State Constitution Preambles, 123 Pennsylvania State Law Review 151-190 (2018). [read post]
2 Mar 2019, 5:42 am by Rob Robinson
Logistic Regression: A state-of-the-art supervised learning algorithm for machine learning that estimates the probability that a document is relevant, based on the features that it contai [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 3:44 am by Edith Roberts
Sullivan and its progeny and revert to its earlier understanding that the First Amendment does not limit state libel law . . . at all”; he “offer[s] some observations about what Thomas’s separate concurrence illustrates about modern trends in ‘originalist’ theory and practice (and the gulf between them). [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 3:03 am by Walter Olson
Sullivan [Will Baude, Cass Sunstein, Ramesh Ponnuru] “A new documentary showcased by PBS presents Montana as a success story of campaign finance reform and Wisconsin’s John Doe investigations as a failure. [read post]
24 Feb 2019, 4:23 pm by INFORRM
Blog Law Online has a post “Is New York Times v Sullivan in danger? [read post]
23 Feb 2019, 3:51 pm by Marty Lederman
Sullivan and its progeny and revert to its earlier understanding that the First Amendment does not limit state libel law . . . at all. [read post]
23 Feb 2019, 12:57 am by Mark Tushnet
Sullivan itself, is that out-of-state publishers aren't in a position to raise their (distinctive?) [read post]
22 Feb 2019, 4:03 am by Edith Roberts
Sullivan,” which “generally shields reporters and news platforms from libel or defamation lawsuits provided they were acting in good faith”; Thomas argued that “the high court was wrong to usurp the role of states in regulating libel. [read post]