Search for: "Tom Goldstein"
Results 921 - 940
of 1,028
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jan 2009, 1:33 pm
(Tom Goldstein opines here; Richard McAdams here; Orin Kerr here). [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 12:27 pm
The post on this blog by colleague Tom Goldstein analyzing Kennedy's concurrence Thursday makes clear why his declarations are controlling, and why race is still not a totally forbidden factor in public education policymaking. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 8:56 am
Tom Goldstein at this blog suggests that the federal government’s decision not to seek en banc review of the Eleventh Circuit’s decision striking down the individual mandate as unconstitutional, setting up a probable petition to the Court, was likely prompted by the difficulty implementing a statute as large and complex as the ACA: “the government genuinely needs to know as soon as practicable whether the law in fact is constitutional in whole or in part. [read post]
26 Jul 2024, 11:48 am
[Disclosure: My husband, Tom Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog, represented the respondents in the court of appeals.] [read post]
30 Aug 2015, 5:52 pm
Aptly describing the core issue, Sequenom’s counsel Tom Goldstein explains: [Under the Federal Circuit’s rule] the person who first discovers a natural phenomenon can never obtain a patent on any practical application of that new knowledge, however surprising or revolutionary the results, unless the steps she teaches to use it are independently novel. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 12:00 pm
Tom Goldstein's comment is certainly correct. [read post]
24 May 2010, 6:37 am
Totenberg cites the analysis of Tom Goldstein on this blog to suggest that Kagan would likely recuse from roughly one-fourth of the cases in her first term. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 9:05 am
(See Margot Kaminski, Paul Ohm, Howard Wasserman, Tom Goldstein, and the terrifyingly prolific Orin Kerr.) [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 5:16 am
Illinois, which is scheduled for oral argument today (and which Tom Goldstein previewed for the blog). [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 6:36 am
The first is SCOTUS Blog -- but Tom Goldstein launched that when he was a solo practitioner and presented the blog as an established institution to Akin Gump. [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 11:53 am
Recent LexBlog Q & A posts: David Maister, law firm practice consultant [2.4.08] Steve Matthews, search engine optimization specialist and founder of Stem Legal [2.1.08] Tom Goldstein, partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and founder of SCOTUSblog [1.30.08] Rick Klau, former VP of publisher services at FeedBurner and current member of Google's content acquisition team [1.29.08] Dan Harris, Seattle international law lawyer &… [read post]
10 May 2015, 9:00 pm
Tom Perriello, the Special Representative for the QDDR, will deliver a keynote address. [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 8:55 am
SCOTUSblog’s Tom Goldstein argued on behalf of Don Quixote, and Kali Borkoski reported on the event for this website. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
A recent episode of Bloomberg Law’s Cases and Controversies podcast features a conversation between law professor Steve Vladeck and “Tom Goldstein, the veteran U.S. [read post]
8 Jan 2008, 4:21 am
Tom Walker of Indy Eyewitness News (13) reported last evening:Washington, D.C. - Attorneys went before the U.S. [read post]
19 Sep 2015, 4:51 am
Unfortunately for Tom Goldstein, SCOTUSBlog had greater longevity than Bloomberg Law, and when your sugar daddy fails, so too does your sponsorship. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 10:57 am
This edition of “Petitions to watch” features petitions raising issues that Tom has determined to have a reasonable chance of being granted, although we post them here without consideration of whether they present appropriate vehicles in which to decide those issues. [read post]
10 May 2010, 8:46 pm
Today’s latest long feature on Kagan, by Amy Goldstein and others at the Washington Post, reviews much of her life and career. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 2:59 pm
On this point she cites the Tom Goldstein HuffPo piece I dissected here. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 6:54 am
SCOTUSblog’s Tom Goldstein calls the decision “a resounding affirmation of the right to engage peacefully in speech, even terribly hurtful speech, on matters of public import,” and the editorial boards of many major newspapers and most commentators seem to support the outcome. [read post]
