Search for: "Opinion of Justices of Supreme Judicial Court"
Results 141 - 160
of 11,480
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2024, 12:57 pm
Judge Matey dissented, arguing that (at least under the Supreme Court's decision in TransUnion v. [read post]
10 Mar 2024, 8:00 am
Because of the Supreme Court’s composition, it may be helpful to read the opinion, including the dissent, which noted: “The Court today needed to resolve only a single question: whether an individual State may keep a Presidential candidate found to have engaged in insurrection off its ballot. [read post]
10 Mar 2024, 7:42 am
Air Force The Scrubbed Scrubs Award: Ontario Ministry of Health, Canada The Judicial Blindfold Award: Mississippi Justice Courts It’s My Party and I Can Hide Records If I Want to Award: Wyoming Department of Education The Fee-l the Burn Award: Baltimore Police Department The Continuing Failure Award: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services The Creative Invoicing Award: Richmond, Va., Police Department The Not-So-Magic Word Award: Augusta County… [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 12:51 pm
No judicial minimalists they.And that brings me to my unusual connection to a pending case, US v. [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 6:30 am
But as judicial appointments have become more politicized and conservative justices have trimmed the sails of ambitious political reform, faith in the legal system as an agent of political reform has waned considerably. [read post]
7 Mar 2024, 10:50 am
Additionally, most divorce lawyers understand you have to make big decisions that will affect your future, and they will encourage you to seek a second (or even third) opinion. [read post]
7 Mar 2024, 6:08 am
As Justice Sutherland described our system in his opinion for a unanimous Court in Massachusetts v. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
This is something the Colorado Supreme Court recognized was necessary, in this case—the determination of whether someone engaged in insurrection ,which required procedures and factual findings.And this is also what Justice Chase on the United States Supreme Court, then writing circuit as a circuit justice in 1869, noted in a case call Griffin's Case. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:16 am
This is something the Colorado Supreme Court recognized was necessary, in this case—the determination of whether someone engaged in insurrection ,which required procedures and factual findings.And this is also what Justice Chase on the United States Supreme Court, then writing circuit as a circuit justice in 1869, noted in a case call Griffin's Case. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 7:15 am
[The Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:49 am
On Monday, the Supreme Court surprised only the most optimistic of folks and reversed the Colorado Supreme Court's decision disqualifying Donald J. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 3:00 am
” Supreme Court transcended ideological divisions The fact is that the Supreme Court justices have proved, again, that they are precisely the “real Supreme Court justices” that the Founding Fathers envisioned. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 1:51 pm
But the Supreme Court may still avoid ruling on the merits.] [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 8:13 am
For what it's worth, I think the Court probably reached the right result with respect to the decision of the Colorado Supreme Court, albeit not quite for the right reasons. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 4:00 am
I was surprised by the per curiam opinion's failure even to address some seemingly obvious objections to the arguments the Court offered to justify its decision. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 3:21 am
How did a unanimous, per curiam, opinion, as concurrer Justice Amy Coney Barrett, turn up the heat? [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 5:56 pm
Pix credit here In a 53 page opinion, the United States District Court for Northern Alabama has ruled, in National Small Business Association v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:43 pm
The Per Curiam Opinion The Supreme Court’s opinion addressed several of these questions. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 12:47 pm
Supreme Curt issued their opinion (per curiam) in Trump v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:51 am
While today's Supreme Court opinion is unanimous, it's notable that both Justice Amy Coney Barrett (writing for herself alone) and the three liberal justices (in a joint opinion) wrote concurrences that seem to reject or at least call into question much of the majority's reasoning. [read post]
