Search for: "Rick Pildes"
Results 61 - 80
of 260
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Apr 2019, 5:30 am
Irvine), Sandy Levinson (Texas), Frank Pasquale (Maryland), Rick Pildes (NYU), John McGinnis (Northwestern), and myself.At the conclusion, Neal and Larry will respond to the commentators. [read post]
1 Apr 2019, 12:16 pm
“How FDR’s Court-Packing Plan Set Progressive Policies Back by 25 Years”: Rick Pildes has this post at the “Balkinization” blog. [read post]
22 May 2018, 7:57 am
Rick Hasen pointed out as soon as the Epic Systems ruling was released, is the fact that there is only one case from the October sitting that the Court has not yet ruled on: Gill v. [read post]
17 May 2018, 4:26 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Rick Hill suggests that the case “is an elegant illustration of how disagreements about baselines can make a hash of distinctions between ‘negative’ prohibitions and ‘affirmative’ mandates. [read post]
1 May 2018, 4:14 am
At the Election Law Blog, Rick Pildes remarks that during oral argument in Abbott v. [read post]
6 Apr 2018, 2:00 am
University of Virginia School of LawRick Pildes, Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law, New York University School of Law , present today as part of the Faculty Workshop Series. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 5:30 am
As Rick Pildes wrote on Lawfare last August, the regulation made extensive departures from the structure of the Independent Counsel Act. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 4:19 am
At the Election Law Blog, Rick Pildes observes that “[d]eciding to hear the Maryland case is a significant signal that a majority of the Court is not going to hold partisan gerrymandering claims to be non-justiciable (that is, inappropriate for judicial resolution)” in the first partisan-gerrymandering case this term, Gill v. [read post]
30 Sep 2017, 5:39 am
Rick Pildes proposed a slightly modified approach to protecting the Special Counsel that would allow judicial review of existing Department of Justice regulations. [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 9:46 am
Rick Pildes outlined the options for congressional lawmakers who want to protect the Mueller investigation by law. [read post]
12 Aug 2017, 3:27 am
Bob Bauer responded with some doubt to Rick Pildes’ August 3 argument that a judicially enforceable codification of regulations on the DOJ special counsel would be constitutional. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 7:58 am
Bob Bauer replied to Rick Pildes’ August 3 argument that a judicially enforceable codification of regulations on the DOJ special counsel would be constitutional. [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 9:30 am
My colleague Rick Pildes has made a thoughtful, well-crafted case for the constitutionality of a judicially enforceable codification of the DOJ special counsel regulations. [read post]
8 Aug 2017, 5:30 am
” Later, Rick Pildes offered a more favorable view of these legislative efforts as mere codifications of safeguards that the Department of Justice had already put in place via regulation. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 4:26 am
And Rick Pildes considered whether Congress could simply codify the DOJ special counsel regulations. [read post]
4 Aug 2017, 1:12 pm
" Rick Pildes has this post at the "Lawfare" blog. [read post]
4 Aug 2017, 12:56 pm
Rick Pildes considered whether Congress could simply codify the DOJ Special Counsel regulations. [read post]
14 Jun 2017, 10:55 am
Rick Pildes and Darryl Levinson have pointed out that our system is better described as separation of parties rather than separation of powers. [read post]
10 Jun 2017, 5:58 am
Rick Pildes took issue with Alan Dershowitz’s recent argument that the President has complete control over all federal law-enforcement investigations, even those that impact himself and those around him. [read post]
9 Jun 2017, 2:25 pm
"In the View of the Supreme Court, Alan Dershowitz is Wrong About the Powers of the President": Rick Pildes has this post at "Lawfare. [read post]
