Search for: "Eric Segall"
Results 161 - 180
of 447
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Oct 2020, 6:00 am
Eric SegallThanks, Jack for engaging with these two questions. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 8:00 am
ES: Jack, to the best of my knowledge, and maybe I'm wrong, you have never addressed the many historical sources collected by Sylvia Snowiss, Jack Rakove and others showing that the framers quite clearly had a conception of judicial review that was modest, humble, and centered around clear constitutional error (and the 14th did not change that according to the best historians of that time other than possibly for protecting the newly freed slaves). [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 11:50 am
Yesterday, prominent liberal constitutional law scholar Eric Segall (who is no fan of Barrett's) wrote that he "agree[s] with my libertarian friend on this" (the friend in question is me). [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 10:20 am
“The Myth of the Originalist Judge”: Eric Segall has this blog post at “Dorf on Law. [read post]
9 Oct 2020, 7:05 am
You can guess the answer, but I recently came across this systematic study by law professor Eric Segall (Georgia State) and a political scientist. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 4:05 pm
I missed the introduction of this bill last week, which Eric Segall discusses. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 2:20 pm
“A Tale of Two American Heroes and the Absurdity of Life Tenure for SCOTUS Justices”: Eric Segall has this post at the “Dorf on Law” blog. [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 8:28 am
As I was completing my prior post on the time passing for Eric Segall's eight-person partisan-divide Court, I thought of a way to save that plan and to put a check on infinite tit-for-tat Court expansion through mutual disarmament: Expand the Court to twelve with three Democratic appointees, then run the Segall plan with a 6-6 partisan divide. [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 2:40 pm
Below the fold are the results of the 2020-2021 Law Professor Twitter Census. [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 6:38 pm
“The Justice Souter Speech Every Law Student Should Read”: Eric Segall has this post at “Dorf on Law. [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 8:40 am
(Eric Segall will be making his second appearance this year.) [read post]
8 Aug 2020, 1:52 pm
” Eric Segall has this post at “Dorf on Law. [read post]
27 Jul 2020, 2:16 pm
Wally Adeyemo, former deputy national security advisor for International Economics at CSIS will discuss the pandemic’s implications for the global economy with Matthew Goodman, senior vice president for economics at CSIS and Stephanie Segal, senior fellow for economics. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 12:42 pm
Segall, Adam Feldman, The Elite Teaching The Elite: Who Gets Hired By The Top Law Schools? [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 7:04 pm
Last week, I was a guest on Professor Eric Segall's new video/podcast interview show, "Supreme Myths. [read post]
26 Jun 2020, 7:30 am
On Wednesday, Eric Segall inaugurated his new video show and podcast, Supreme Myths, by interviewing me about originalism and living constitutionalism, constitutional design, and life tenure for the federal judiciary. [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 1:59 pm
However, this would be the practical equivalent of accepting that there is no strong difference between originalism and living constitutionalism, as Eric Segall and others have urged.This is relevant to "Optimistic Originalism" because the continuing resistance to fully accepting Balkin’s deal has significant implications for the effort by OPM originalists to understand the Reconstruction amendments, the Fourteenth Amendment in particular, in an optimistic… [read post]
29 May 2020, 9:05 pm
” Exempting places of worship from quarantine orders is a “terrible mistake,” University of Texas Law School’s Sanford Levinson and Georgia State University College of Law’s Eric Segall write in the American Constitution Society Expert Forum. [read post]
20 May 2020, 10:53 am
Segall have this essay online at The New York Times. [read post]
17 May 2020, 5:44 am
In case you missed it a couple of months ago, Eric Segall concisely skewered Supreme Court constitutional law jurisprudence, offering "10 representative examples that show how judge-made constitutional law is little more than the aggregate of the Justices' value preferences or, on some occasions, the results of bargaining among the Justices to reach a five-vote result that makes little sense. [read post]
