Search for: "Comfort v. Comfort"
Results 101 - 120
of 5,277
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Feb 2024, 1:28 pm
The relevant precedent would be Arizona v. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 11:37 am
[This is the second installment in a series about the oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 9:20 am
Mitchell was most comfortable with intratextualist inferences. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 7:00 pm
KRISTINA PASCARELLA AND ANNA D’ ANTONIO, Petitioner,v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 3:47 pm
Continue Reading The post Law With Impact – 4 Years Later – Student Suicide Prevention: Nguyen v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 2:35 pm
The case is the most significant elections matter the justices have been forced to confront since the Bush v. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 9:36 am
But they knew, too, that he would be to blame for giving aid and comfort to the assassin who would. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 5:50 am
” So, members drafted a provision that declared that “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States,… [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 3:00 am
In Trump v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 5:19 am
We note that in the Trump v. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 3:36 pm
As I explained in one of my earlier posts, several or all of the Justices might be inclined to decide the case on some ground that doesn’t require the Court to decide whether Donald Trump is eligible to be President, if such an “off-ramp” solution is legally available. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 7:35 am
Link: Listen to Live Arguments at the Court The case, Trump v. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 7:20 am
Lash quotes the "Minority Report" as follows: [Section Three] disfranchises all of that class of persons therein named, who "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof," but denounces no penalties against those who may hereafter commit the same act. . . . [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 9:59 am
Trump v. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 5:05 am
" Trump's brief on the merits in the Supreme Court in Trump v. [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 6:29 pm
” 395 U.S. at 447; see also Counterman v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 2:59 pm
Graham v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am
” Some amici, such as Professor Kurt Lash, have filed briefs arguing that the presidency is not a “disqualified” office covered by the Positions Clause—in other words, that Section 3 permits someone to serve as President (or Vice-President) even if they are a covered person who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States (indeed, even if they’ve “given aid or comfort” to foreign… [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 6:51 am
Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Trump v. [read post]
31 Jan 2024, 5:45 pm
(Tannen Maury/UPI/Newscom)Today, I filed an amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
