Search for: "Stevens v. Brennan" Results 81 - 100 of 318
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jun 2012, 5:12 pm by Gilles Cuniberti
Citron, The Case of the Retired Justice: How Would Justice John Paul Stevens Have Voted in J. [read post]
9 Jan 2008, 11:33 am
Benjamin Stevens of Stevens MacPhail in his South Carolina Family Law Blog Supreme Court preview: the most important elections case since Bush v. [read post]
4 May 2012, 10:47 am by Eugene Volokh
Four Justices (Brennan, Marshall, Stevens, and Blackmun) took the view that removing books based on disagreement with the ideas that the books expressed would be unconstitutional; they therefore voted to affirm the appellate court decision, a decision that sent the case back to trial court for factfinding on the motivation for the removals. [read post]
7 Oct 2016, 4:46 am by Edith Roberts
Coverage of Wednesday’s argument in Buck v. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 1:30 pm by Tom Goldstein
Circuit Judge Merrick Garland clerked for Judge Henry Friendly on the Second Circuit and then for Justice William Brennan. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 7:00 am by Joshua Matz
” In the Washington Monthly, Michael O’Donnell reviews Five Chiefs, the recently released memoir of retired Justice John Paul Stevens. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 5:42 am by Anthony Gaughan
As Justice Brennan noted in his concurring opinion in New York Times Co. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2010, 6:29 am by Adam Chandler
Yesterday’s oral argument in AT&T Mobility Services v. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 11:08 pm by Eugene Volokh
Greenmoss Builders, Inc., 472 U.S. 749, 784 (1985) (Brennan, J., joined by Marshall, Blackmun, and Stevens, JJ., dissenting), and id. at 773 (White, J., concurring in judgment) — which expressly concluded that “in the context of defamation law, the rights of the institutional media are no greater and no less than those enjoyed by other individuals or organizations engaged in the same activities,” id. at 784 (a view expressly approved by Justice White, id. at 773).… [read post]
21 Sep 2007, 6:26 am
In other words, Brudney argues that Justices such as Brennan, Marshall and Stevens have used legislative history in a principled fashion. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 5:55 pm by Colin O'Keefe
The biggest story across the LexBlog Network today, by far, was the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in NLRB v. [read post]
25 Jan 2023, 2:00 pm
But 4 justices agreed with Justice Brennan that knowledge of your product ending up in the forum state -- which virtually certainly existed here -- was good enough even without the "additional conduct" listed by O'Connor, and Justice Steven says that knowledge plus a certain number of continuous sales gets his vote too, resulting (as there) in a majority on that score. [read post]