Search for: "Richard Wasserman"
Results 61 - 80
of 148
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Nov 2015, 2:54 am
” Briefly: At PrawfsBlawg, Richard Re looks at the possibility that the Court’s first decision in Abigail Fisher’s challenge to the University of Texas at Austin’s consideration of race in its undergraduate admissions process established jurisdiction for Fisher’s second trip to the Court. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 5:00 am
Howard Wasserman covered the ruling for this blog, with other coverage from Taylor Gillan of JURIST. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 7:51 am
Other early coverage comes from Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal; Adam Liptak of The New York Times; Josh Gerstein at Politico; Jaclyn Belcyk at JURIST; Sahil Kapur at Talking Points Memo; Robert Barnes of The Washington Post; Steven Mazie of The Economist; Greg Stohr at Bloomberg Businessweek; Bill Mears at CNN; and Richard Wolf of USA Today. [read post]
25 Apr 2008, 1:29 am
Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Sam Wasserman of counsel), for respondent. [read post]
15 May 2018, 4:19 am
Howard Wasserman analyzes the opinion for this blog. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 8:29 am
Wasserman. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 8:29 am
Wasserman. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 3:52 am
This blog’s opinion analysis comes from Howard Wasserman. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 5:30 am
[vi] See Wasserman, Legal Process in A Box, at 399-401 (discussing how the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence has substituted its own policy preferences for Congress’s by reading into the FAA its opposition to class actions). [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 4:43 am
Commentary comes from Richard Re and Hadar Aviram at PrawfsBlawg, and from Noah Feldman at Bloomberg View. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 4:15 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman remarks that “[t]he opinions seemed to look at different facts triggering different analyses. [read post]
15 Jun 2018, 4:30 am
” Additional commentary comes from the First Amendment Blog, Jennifer Tiedemann at the Goldwater Institute, Adav Noti at Take Care, Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, and Richard Hasen at Slate, who concludes that “the opinion shows a more realistic and functional understanding of the political process than the court has shown in campaign finance cases. [read post]
23 Nov 2009, 5:49 am
Sunwolf, Ron Sylvester, Brian Tannebaum, Suja Thomas, Tara Trask, Eric Turkewitz, Bill Tyroler, Lew Wasserman, Diane Wiley, Cindy Zautcke, WUWM Milwaukee Public Radio's "Lake Effect" program, the Wisconsin Law Journal, the American Society of Trial Consultants, and all my juror artists, especially Mike Rohde, who was brave enough to let me post his drawing when there were no other juror artists yet. [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 3:46 am
Howard Wasserman analyzes the argument for this blog. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 4:08 am
” Briefly: Howard Wasserman has this blog’s analysis of Tuesday’s argument in Nutraceutical Corp. v. [read post]
28 May 2014, 4:19 am
Commentary on the decision comes from Noah Feldman, who argues at Bloomberg View that, “[o]n closer examination . . . the decision is less satisfying than it appears”; from Kent Scheidegger at Crime and Consequences, who observes that there “is already a movement afoot to remove IQ ceilings from the definition of intellectual disability altogether” and argues that the movement “must not succeed” in the context of eligibility for the death penalty because… [read post]
3 Sep 2012, 5:24 am
Pérez Congressman Jared Polis of Colorado Congressman David Price of North Carolina Illinois Governor Pat Quinn Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada President of Planned Parenthood Action Fund Cecile Richards Minneapolis Mayor R.T. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 7:28 am
” More reporting comes from Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal, in an expanded version of a story that Dan included yesterday, Richard Wolf of USA Today, Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed, Ruthann Robson at the Constitutional Law Prof Blog, Bill Mears of CNN, Jaclyn Belczyk of JURIST, and Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 4:07 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman cites “the limits of the judicial role” as a possible reason why the late Justice Thurgood Marshall is “never in the conversation about civil rights icon[s]. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 12:14 pm
Kenneth Jost of Jost on Justice criticizes the book as “flawed,” while – commenting on a critical review of the book by Judge Richard Posner – Howard Wasserman of PrawfsBlawg notes that Justice Scalia may have avoided Judge Posner’s criticism by citing in his book to his “votes [that] have been ideologically unexpected while also arguably adhering to some form of originalism–the Confrontation Clause cases of the last decade, beginning with… [read post]
