Search for: "Michael Dorf"
Results 1181 - 1200
of 1,550
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jun 2018, 4:11 am
” Additional commentary comes from Michael Dorf at his eponymous blog, Robert George in an op-ed for The New York Times, the editorial board of The Washington Post, Rick Hills at PrawfsBlawg, Ian Millhiser at ThinkProgress, Jennifer Rubin in an op-ed for The Washington Post, Erica Goldberg at PrawfsBlawg, Jennifer Finney Boylan in an op-ed for The New York Times, Noah Feldman in an op-ed for Bloomberg, Lisa Keen at Keen News Service, Michael Farris at National… [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 3:49 am
’” At Dorf on Law, Michael Dorf posits that, contrary to the view of his fellow “law nerds,” who think “the public will view the case as fundamentally about trans equality, but in fact it’s mostly about administrative law,” “the uninformed public” may be “mostly right and the law nerds … mostly wrong”; if so, “then the administrative deference issue is secondary: the core question is whether… [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 9:01 pm
My husband and fellow law professor Michael C. [read post]
24 May 2023, 7:40 am
(The most stimulating of these was Neil Buchanan and Michael Dorf's paper on the presumed constitutional "trilemma. [read post]
12 May 2020, 4:05 am
At Dorf on Law, Michael Dorf pushes back against Justice Clarence Thomas’ originalist critique of the First Amendment overbreadth doctrine in a concurrence last week in United States v. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
Her most recent book, Beating Hearts: Abortion and Animal Rights (co-authored with Michael C. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 6:28 am
But this specific question on gender discrimination and Scalia's view was the subject of a Daily Kos post I wrote in 2006: Here is a wonderful question that Professor Michael Dorf presents to "originalists that drives home this point: Even when the evidence of the original understanding is clear, and even when it is simple to locate an appropriate analogy, originalism may still yield bad answers because values change. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 7:05 am
At Dorf on Law, Michael C. [read post]
2 May 2011, 5:00 am
Cornell Law School Professor Michael C. [read post]
7 May 2009, 2:38 pm
In fact, Professor Michael Dorf, a highly respected constitutional law scholar, concludes that Rosen's analysis of the footnote lacks merit. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 7:23 am
Michael Dorf and Andrew Koppelman and me in our amicus brief in the case, and see Prof. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 8:43 am
” At Dorf on Law, Neil Buchanan responds to an earlier post by Mike Dorf on the Wal-Mart case; he concludes that “we cannot say whether the Roberts Court’s pro-business decisions are increasing or decreasing economic efficiency, because they are doing both and neither. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 4:25 am
At Dorf on Law, Michael Dorf observes that “[t]hanks to Matal, the government speech doctrine will not swallow the First Amendment,” and he explores the implications of the decision for “claims to opt out of general obligations such as those imposed by antidiscrimination law” “in which an opt-out was asserted as a matter of free speech. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 3:42 am
” At Dorf on Law, Michael Dorf questions the majority’s conclusion that the plaintiffs were treated unequally even though the Montana Supreme Court eliminated the scholarship program for everyone. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 2:25 pm
Michael Dorf's, Prof. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 4:15 am
” Additional commentary and analysis come from Michael Dorf at Dorf on Law, Sam Levine at HuffPost, Imani Gandy at Rewire.News, Ruthann Robson at the Constitutional Law Prof Blog, Matt Ford at The New Republic, Ian Millhiser at ThinkProgress, Richard Hasen at Slate, and Mark Joseph Stern, in two posts at Slate, here and here, who argues that “[t]he faceoff between Alito and Sotomayor over voting rights reveals a deep fissure between the justices—not just… [read post]
7 May 2020, 3:58 am
” Additional commentary comes from Erica Goldberg at In a Crowded Theater and Michael Dorf at Dorf on Law. [read post]
10 Nov 2007, 7:46 am
Dorf - via J.K. [read post]
13 Jun 2007, 9:32 pm
They'll just slap another defendant's name onto the top of the opinions they've already drafted and issue them next year, instead.UPDATE: As reader Greg May points out, Professor Michael Dorf made the same basic point last week, with the difference that he analyzes it in conventional legal terms. [read post]
15 Jun 2007, 6:37 am
Michael Dorf (Dorf on Law) explains how a unanimous court rejected its arguments that Philip Morris was "assisting a federal officer," simply by complying with the law, and was therefore entitled to force the action into the federal system (more by Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog and by Scott Nelson at Consumer Law & Policy Blog);But just because you started suit doesn't mean you'll get to finish. [read post]
