Search for: "J. Scalia" Results 141 - 160 of 1,607
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 May 2022, 12:42 pm by Eugene Volokh
California (1973); but, as Justice Scalia noted, Miller only added extra elements the government must show beyond this "dominant theme" constitutional requirement.) [read post]
20 May 2022, 1:56 pm by David Kopel
That tradition is a living thing. 367 U.S. 497, 542 (1961) (Harlan, J., dissenting) (emphasis added). [read post]
16 May 2022, 10:34 am by Katherine Pompilio
Hamre, CSIS president and CEO; J. [read post]
4 May 2022, 8:20 am by Josh Blackman
Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 498 (1991) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part) ("the presumed legislative intent not to eliminate traditional immunities is our only justification for limiting the categorical language of the statute"); Ziglar v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 9:25 am by Josh Blackman
Women's Health Center, Inc. (1994) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part); Whole Woman's Health (THOMAS, J., dissenting); id. [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
But some calls for reform arise more from a felt need to respond to what are seen as abuses of the confirmation process in very recent years.[13]  As is well-known, the Senate refused even to consider President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in March 2016, shortly after the death of Justice Scalia in February, on the ground that it was within 8 months of a presidential election and the Senate should wait and “give the people a voice” in the selection of a new… [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 9:05 pm by Stephen M. Bainbridge
Gathers, 490 U.S. 805, 824 (1989) (Scalia, J., dissenting). [13] Stout, supra note 2, at 168. [14] Thompson v. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 9:09 am by Katherine Pompilio
Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies; and Sheriff Mark J. [read post]
9 Mar 2022, 4:30 am by Sherry F. Colb
Last month, Professor Dorf explained how the SCOTUS majority's hostility to the Voting Rights Act could portend the end of disparate impact litigation, thus bringing us closer to a possibility that Justice Scalia anticipated in his concurrence in the 2009 case of Ricci v. [read post]