Search for: "Matter of Nixon C." Results 81 - 100 of 260
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jun 2020, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
Dooley say that “no matter whether th’ constitution follows th’ flag or not, th’ supreme coort follows th’ iliction returns. [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 7:00 am by Ronald Collins
  Question: On October 14, 1971, there was an unsigned piece in the New York Times on potential Supreme Court nominees Nixon was then considering. [read post]
23 Apr 2020, 9:32 am by Paul Smith and Adav Noti
To be sure, the unbinding of the electors is unlikely to matter if the result of the presidential election is one-sided. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 6:00 am by Charlotte Butash
The district court granted the committee’s motion for summary judgment, holding that it had subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 11:11 am by Jeh Johnson
And the subject matter—“unilateralist presidencies and submissive legislatures”—is of great interest to me. [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 5:03 am by David Post
So what's the point of hearing additional evidence on the matter? [read post]
31 Jan 2020, 12:16 pm by Quinta Jurecic, Alan Z. Rozenshtein
In a perverse way, Trump’s character failings almost make it harder to pin corrupt intent on him: He may very well believe, like King Louis XIV, l'état c'est moi—that he is the state and that anything that’s good for him is good for the country. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 9:06 am by Stacie Rosenzweig
(Ironically, the exception may be lawyers in high office—Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon, and Spiro Agnew were all disbarred by at least one court.)Perhaps this is my defense hat showing, but I’m always reluctant to tell anyone (even a friend messaging me on Facebook) that a lawyer I only know about from news reports should be or will be disbarred, or suspended for that matter. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 5:31 am by David V. Gioe
As will be observed in the analysis below, document provenance matters. [read post]
10 Jan 2020, 11:56 am by Jonathan Shaub
The article then goes on to list three actions as the basis for that charge: (a) directing the White House to defy a subpoena for documents; (b) directing executive branch agencies and offices to defy subpoenas for documents; and (c) directing current and former executive branch officials “not to cooperate with the Committees” and to defy subpoenas for testimony. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 9:00 am by Masha Simonova
He named Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator in that case. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 5:59 am by Jonathan Shaub
But each largely makes four basic points: (a) The concept of executive privilege is hotly disputed; (b) there are very few relevant court cases and none that provide definitive answers; (c) there are a number of historical incidents, from the administration of George Washington to that of Barack Obama, that are of debatable—and contested—significance; and (d) the legal resolution of these highly disputed questions is likely of little practical significance. [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 10:48 am by Gabriel Schoenfeld
Over at National Review, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 5:35 am by Benjamin Schwartz
” Early drafts of the Constitution originally provided only that the president “may” recommend “matters” to Congress. [read post]
29 Sep 2019, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
The Data Matters blog from Mischon de Reya had a piece “Children’s data protection rights: a data protection casualty? [read post]
10 Sep 2019, 2:11 pm by Molly E. Reynolds, Margaret Taylor
” On the second point, the authorization for committee staff to question witnesses is an exercise of Rule XI, clause 2(j)(2)(C) of the House rules, which states that committees may so authorize staff. [read post]