Search for: "Carrie Severino" Results 81 - 100 of 139
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jun 2019, 2:36 pm by Jon Levitan
Early commentary comes from Ruthann Robson of Constitutional Law Prof Blog; Steven Waldman for The Washington Post, Jay Michaelson for the Daily Beast; Mark Joseph Stern for Slate; Carrie Severino for the National Review; Noah Feldman for Bloomberg; Kelly Shackelford for Fox News; Nicole Russell for the Washington Examiner; Lisa Soronen for CitiesSpeak; and Ian Milhiser for ThinkProgress. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 10:58 am by Randy Barnett
  On today’s NRO, attorney Carrie Severino, who has authored several excellent amicus briefs on behalf of Senate and House leadership in the challenges to the Affordable Care Act, has a column criticizing this proposal: Senate GOP Jobs Bill Contains a Landmine for Federalism.The law’s own justification for its constitutional authority should be chilling to anyone committed to limited federal power. [read post]
20 Sep 2018, 3:54 am by Edith Roberts
” Commentary comes from Elizabeth Slattery and Carrie Severino in an episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, Caroline Reilly at Rewire.News, Penny Nance in an op-ed for USA Today, the editorial board of The Washington Post, Charles Blow in an op-ed for The New York Times, and Andrew McCarthy in an op-ed for Fox News. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 3:36 pm by Andrew Hamm
Segall at ACS Law, Carrie Severino at National Review, Timothy G. [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 4:25 am by Amy Howe
At the National Review Online’s Bench Memos, Carrie Severino dissects last week’s oral arguments in Williams-Yulee v. [read post]
19 Jul 2019, 3:26 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: In a bonus episode of the Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast, “Carrie Severino and Mollie Hemingway join Elizabeth Slattery to talk about their new book, ‘Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 1:42 pm by Kiera Flynn
Aizenman of the Washington Post, Paige Winfield Cunningham of the Washington Times,  Daniel Fisher at Forbes, Fox News, Jason Kane of PBS News Hour’s The Rundown blog, Sam Baker of The Hill, Neil Munro of the Daily Caller, Carrie Severino at the National Review Online’s Bench Memos page, Jim Nolan at the Richmond Times Dispatch, and Julian Walker at the Virginian-Pilot all have coverage. [read post]
27 Nov 2016, 6:25 am by Embajador Microjuris al Día
Carrie Severino, una ex oficial jurídico de Thomas señaló que las alegaciones son tontas, pues Thomas siempre trató a sus oficiales jurídicos –tanto varones como mujeres—con el más alto respeto y que este permanece como uno de sus mentores y modelo a seguir. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 10:27 am by Andrew Hamm
Carrie Severino of National Review argues that the distinction between nomination and appointment needs to be maintained in this discussion, and again at National Review she argues that Scalia’s seat should remain vacant. [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 7:39 am by David Gans
On the other end of the spectrum, Carrie Severino on Bench Memos resorts to the silliest form of guilt-by-association imaginable, suggesting that because Constitutional Accountability Center – the organizing force behind the pledge – includes on its staff individuals that – horrors! [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 9:14 am by Amanda Rice
” At Bench Memos, Carrie Severino argues that conservatives should be pleased with Kagan’s confirmation, including because “the debate [over the confirmation] was focused not on sordid personal attacks but on real issues of judicial philosophy and temperament. [read post]
8 May 2014, 5:36 am by Benjamin Wittes
As Carrie Severino, writing in National Review, put it approvingly, Barron’s nomination is especially notable because of the strange-bedfellows coalition opposing it, at least for now. [read post]
21 Sep 2018, 4:00 am by Edith Roberts
” Commentary comes from Carrie Severino at National Review, Kate Shaw in an op-ed for The New York Times, Elizabeth Slattery at The Daily Signal, and Catherine Rampell in an op-ed for The Washington Post. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 7:57 am
Carrie Severino (Harvard 2005 / Sentelle) 4. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:41 am by Amy Howe
”  In The Huffington Post, Doug Kendall contends that “one of the key assertions made by the central Supreme Court advocates for King has been called false by the very senator relied upon by these advocates,” but at the National Review’s Bench Memos blog Carrie Severino counters that “the petitioners in the case don’t think their case turns on Ben Nelson’s subjective reading of the law, much less on an after-the-fact… [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 3:45 am by Amy Howe
Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico; at the National Review’s Bench Memos, where Carrie Severino weighs in on the oral argument; from LeRoy Goldman, who discusses the political implications of the Court’s ruling in the Asheville Citizen-Times; and from Jonathan Cohn, also in The Huffington Post, who contends that, “[t]o find a case in modern history that produced a similarly widespread, immediate impact, you . . . probably have to go back to Roe v. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 1:00 pm by Kali Borkoski
Briefly: The op-ed on recusal and the health care cases by former federal judge and Attorney General Michael Mukasey (which Joshua covered yesterday) generated responses from Jonathan Adler at the Volokh Conspiracy and Carrie Severino at the National Review Online’s Bench Memos. [read post]
29 Aug 2019, 8:16 am by Kalvis Golde
” At Washington Independent Review of Books, Kenneth Jost reviews t new books regarding shifts in the Supreme Court nomination process, “Confirmation Bias” by Carl Hulse and “Justice on Trial” by Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino, remarking that despite dramatic differences all three authors “end in a kind of agreement that the judicial confirmation process is badly broken but cite different evidence thereof. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 7:57 am
Carrie Severino (Harvard 2005 / Sentelle) 4. [read post]
16 Mar 2012, 7:20 am by Joshua Matz
   And at the National Review Online, Carrie Severino responds to a recent flurry of editorials and opinion pieces by “counsel[ing] the justices to spend the remaining weeks reading those thousands of pages of briefing, and to ignore the media’s unsolicited advice. [read post]