Search for: "Robert McConnell"
Results 741 - 760
of 773
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jun 2007, 11:26 am
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito believe that "WRTL's three ads are plainly not the functional equivalent of express advocacy. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 3:14 pm
Roberts, Jr.: "[T]he principal opinion's attempt at distinguishing McConnell [v. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 2:02 pm
WRTL is the anti-McConnell. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 12:40 pm
The test that Roberts/Alito embrace is essentially the same, decontexutal see no evil approach of the lower court: if an ad can be viewed as not about electing a candidate (and instead about an issue), it must be viewed that way and exempt from the PAC requirement. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 10:46 am
I have little doubt Chief Justice Roberts will go there eventually as well. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 10:27 am
McConnell upheld the broader definition. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 9:08 am
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito concluded that these cases did not present the occasion to revisit McConnell's holding that a corporation's express advocacy of a candidate or his opponent shortly before an election may be prohibited. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 6:55 am
Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas wanted to overrule the 2003 decision in McConnell v. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 2:45 am
The fourth dissenter was Rehnquist, and Roberts, who replaced Rehnquist may be expected to join Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy as well.So, Roberts and Alito vote as expected. [read post]
10 May 2007, 10:14 am
In McConnell, Justice O'Connor, since replaced by Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., supported the ban; Chief Justice William Rehnquist, since replaced by Justice Samuel Alito, Jr., did not. [read post]
26 Apr 2007, 1:01 am
The Court rejected a facial challenge McConnell in 2003, but this is an as-applied challenge, and, moreover, McConnell was decided 5-4 with O'Connor in the majority. [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 9:50 am
Roberts, for example, sought to explore ways to avoid an overruling of the 2003 decision in McConnell v. [read post]
24 Apr 2007, 2:56 pm
., Lead Counsel for Wisconsin Right to Life, has this piece; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has this commentary in today's Wall Street Journal. [read post]
20 Apr 2007, 5:54 pm
Here is the entire list of Senators and their votes: YEAs —64 Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Breaux (D-LA) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Byrd (D-WV) Campbell (R-CO) Carper (D-DE) Chambliss (R-GA) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Conrad (D-ND) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) Daschle (D-SD) DeWine (R-OH) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Frist (R-TN) Graham (R-SC)… [read post]
18 Apr 2007, 9:36 am
These Senators voted to not filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court: Akaka (D-HI) Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT)Bennett (R-UT) Bingaman (D-NM) Bond (R-MO)Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Burr (R-NC) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN)Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Cornyn (R-TX)Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) DeWine (R-OH) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM)… [read post]
22 Mar 2007, 9:56 am
Roberts, Jr., the group -- Wisconsin Right to Life -- asked the Court to reconsider one facet of the 2003 decision in McConnell v. [read post]
21 Mar 2007, 3:26 pm
That McConnell will filibuster, that Bush will veto. [read post]
14 Mar 2007, 10:52 am
On the merits, their arguments -- originally championed by Judge Michael McConnell when he was a Chicago faculty member -- might well be convincing. [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 10:58 pm
I have been communicating with Janet of www.parli.com, (Robert McConnell Productions). [read post]
8 Mar 2007, 6:59 am
I'm quoting that definition of "public meaning originalism from Larry Solum's colloquy with Robert Bennett. [read post]
