Search for: "Trump v. Wisconsin Elections Commission" Results 81 - 95 of 95
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2022, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for joining Congress’ investigation of the attack on the Capitol and Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat, calling the probe an attack on “legitimate political discourse. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
Trump’s Claim That He Can’t Be Prosecuted Collides with Precedents Yahoo News – Adam Liptak (New York Times) | Published: 10/12/2023 Among the bold claims in a recent motion filed by Donald Trump seeking to dismiss the federal indictment accusing him of conspiring to undermine the 2020 election, there was a significant concession. [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 9:05 pm by Bryn Hines
A bipartisan group of Senators introduced two bills to reform election laws in the wake of the events of January 6, 2021, and President Donald Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election. [read post]
13 Sep 2017, 4:19 am by Edith Roberts
” At the Election Law Blog, Rick Hasen observes that “[f]or those who expect Justice Kennedy to be a savior here—or in the Gill partisan gerrymandering case (where he also voted with the Court to stop an interim remedy in Wisconsin pending Supreme Court resolution)—this is one data point against that hope. [read post]
12 Mar 2023, 9:31 am by Dave Maass
Commodity Futures Trading Commission sent four Glomars; the U.S. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which misconstrued a Colorado official's isolated statement as widespread anti-religious bias; Trump v. [read post]
18 Nov 2023, 4:28 am by Mark Graber
” Several members of the Thirty-Ninth Congress spoke of all elected members of the national government as “officers of the government. [read post]
28 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by Noah Brown
Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. [read post]
29 Dec 2022, 9:05 pm by Victoria Hawekotte
The Trump Administration issued the governing rule interpreting the Act, which limits its scope to exclude LGBTQ+ protections. [read post]