Search for: "Barrett v. Hand"
Results 81 - 100
of 499
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2024, 11:45 am
The day after it decided Bruen, the Court handed down its decision in Dobbs v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 11:45 am
With Thomas and the Trump trio – Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett – this is the crew that struck down Roe v. [read post]
16 May 2024, 9:49 pm
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the CFPB's funding mechanism in its 7-2 decision in CFPB v. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:58 am
On the one hand, the argument for the fragility of Sullivan after Bruen is examined in Alexander Hiland & Michael L Smith “Using Bruen to Overturn New York Times v Sullivan” 50 Pepperdine Law Review (forthcoming) (SSRN). [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 7:39 am
I will not be by my computer tomorrow morning during hand-down time, so any updates will come later.The post Counting The Votes In An Unusual Per Curiam Opinion in <i>Gonzalez v. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 10:46 am
The government may win this case and tie its own hands. [read post]
12 Mar 2021, 5:53 am
To the extent that the Roberts court had a center of gravity, Chief Justice Roberts was it.Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s arrival in late October changed all that, and quickly. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 8:24 am
The Barrett v. [read post]
28 Nov 2020, 5:46 am
Science, but God v. [read post]
1 Dec 2021, 9:39 am
AND: On the theme of keeping the government's hands out of our body, Amy Coney Barrett brought up mandatory vaccination. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 2:00 pm
The first, as SG Prelogar argued effectively, is that Texas has unclean hands. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 7:35 pm
The more recent case, known as Garland v. [read post]
26 Jun 2023, 4:30 am
Justices Gorsuch, Barrett and Thomas concurred in the judgment. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 7:13 am
27 Sep 2016, 4:20 pm
This is a Norwich Pharmacal order, named for the case in which it was first granted (see Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133, [1973] UKHL 6 (26 June 1973); see also The Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd [2013] 1 All ER 928, [2012] 1 WLR 3333, [2012] UKSC 55 (21 November 2012)), and the Supreme Court has affirmed that it forms part of Irish law (see Megaleasing v Barrett (No 2) [1993] ILRM 497; Ryanair… [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 8:03 am
I still think the Chief Justice holds Trump v. [read post]
15 Dec 2007, 12:57 pm
Let's explore this question by looking at some of the pleadings filed in Jones v. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 3:32 pm
Indeed, Section 230 applies even if the "republisher" publishes the full text of the third party content rather than linking to it (e.g., Barrett v. [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 4:25 am
Moore v. [read post]
