Search for: "Clarence Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice"
Results 761 - 780
of 2,837
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2021, 5:54 am
Here’s the Monday morning read: Fetal Viability, Long an Abortion Dividing Line, Faces a Supreme Court Test (Adam Liptak, The New York Times) Chief Justice John Roberts is at the epicenter of an abortion dispute before the Supreme Court (Joan Biskupic, CNN) For Clarence Thomas, avowed critic of Roe v. [read post]
22 Nov 2021, 9:12 am
” Dissent Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. [read post]
10 Nov 2021, 3:42 pm
” Justice Clarence Thomas was skeptical. [read post]
3 Nov 2021, 10:26 am
In both cases, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch noted that they would have granted the petitions. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 12:59 pm
The U.S. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 5:45 pm
Three justices – one vote short of the four needed to review the case on the merits – indicated that they would have granted the diocese’s petition: Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 4:30 pm
He begins by noting that today is the 30th anniversary of the investiture of Justice Clarence Thomas. [read post]
27 Oct 2021, 7:51 am
More broadly, the challengers warn (as Justice Clarence Thomas has in the past) against treating the Second Amendment as a “second-class right. [read post]
25 Oct 2021, 5:30 am
Supreme Court will hear challenge to Texas ban on most abortions, but law remains in effectSotomayor criticizes colleagues for allowing Texas abortion ban to remain in effectLev Parnas, Ex-Giuliani Ally, Is Convicted of Campaign Finance Charges Unionized Manitoba health-care worker fired for drinking can't challenge termination using Human Rights Code: Supreme Court The House of Commons vaccine rule puts O'Toole in an awkward spotJudge rules homeless… [read post]
25 Oct 2021, 5:30 am
Supreme Court will hear challenge to Texas ban on most abortions, but law remains in effectSotomayor criticizes colleagues for allowing Texas abortion ban to remain in effectLev Parnas, Ex-Giuliani Ally, Is Convicted of Campaign Finance Charges Unionized Manitoba health-care worker fired for drinking can't challenge termination using Human Rights Code: Supreme Court The House of Commons vaccine rule puts O'Toole in an awkward spotJudge rules homeless… [read post]
25 Oct 2021, 5:03 am
Only four of the nine who served that term remain: Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito Jr. [read post]
18 Oct 2021, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 11:08 am
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch noted that they would have granted review in that case — just short of the four votes it takes to win review. [read post]
Centaurs, Jean Valjean, and a proposed three-sentence ruling on the meaning of favorable termination
13 Oct 2021, 2:58 pm
The justices pushed Ali to define the nature of Thompson’s civil claim, with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh pushing on the elements of that claim, the timing of the seizure, and whether the court should decide these antecedent issues rather than the question presented. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 12:32 pm
Justice Clarence Thomas asked Feigin what test the Supreme Court should use to review the 1st Circuit’s ruling. [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 10:43 am
Counsel for the Government At oral argument in the Supreme Court, Acting U.S. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 1:04 pm
Justice Clarence Thomas was the first to raise this issue, noting that Mitchell and Jessen “have testified about the treatment of detainees before. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 7:43 am
ShareThe first oral argument of the Supreme Court’s new term, Mississippi v. [read post]
5 Oct 2021, 12:33 pm
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch indicated that they would have voted to grant the petition; perhaps they are trying to dislodge the additional votes necessary to win rehearing. [read post]
5 Oct 2021, 10:39 am
” Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett wondered if there were Sixth Amendment concerns given that both of the proposed interpretations may require improper judicial factfinding. [read post]
