Search for: "Jason Mazzone"
Results 161 - 180
of 242
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2008, 4:24 pm
REV. 185 The Commandeerer in Chief Jason Mazzone, 83 NOTRE DAME L. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 10:42 am
For more on the article, see these comments from Matt Bodie, Brian Leiter, Jason Mazzone, and Larry Ribstein. [read post]
18 Feb 2009, 12:20 pm
This study runs alongside Minna Kotkin's study from last fall about the percentage of articles in leading law journals by women, which we spoke about here.Gender bias has been much in the legal academic blogosphere of late (like Jason Mazzone's creatively titled "Constitutional Law as Computer Science").I have a deep concern over the number of women writing in legal history. [read post]
18 Feb 2012, 8:25 am
Jason Mazzone's never been stumped yet -- which is sort of shocking to me because one of the buildings I couldn't find anywhere on the net ... and I knew what I was searching for! [read post]
12 Feb 2023, 6:05 am
Scholars interested in presenting a paper at the conference should first e-mail a title and summary of the proposed paper along with a CV to Professor Jason Mazzone at mazzonej[@]illinois.edu. [read post]
29 Oct 2020, 9:01 pm
Assume that in California v. [read post]
26 May 2025, 9:01 pm
Many Court watchers have been interested in the Justices’ decision on Thursday in Trump v. [read post]
8 Feb 2009, 3:17 am
Jason Mazzone's book Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property is due out from the Stanford University Press in 2009. [read post]
11 Oct 2010, 10:35 am
” At Balkinization, Jason Mazzone deems the occasional four-four tie to be preferable to the system recently proposed by Senator Patrick Leahy, in which a retired Justice would step in when an active Justice was recused. [read post]
21 Apr 2025, 9:01 pm
For us law professors, the recent per curiam decision by the U.S. of Court Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Umphress v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 2:34 pm
By comparing the practices of courts around the world, the conference will trace the movement (or not) of constitutional history from the academy to the courthouse and examine the risks and benefits of modern practices.Scholars interested in presenting a paper at the conference should e-mail a title and brief summary of the proposed paper to Professor Jason Mazzone at mazzonej[@]illinois.edu. [read post]
24 Aug 2020, 11:39 am
I confess myself quite mystified by the argument underlying Jason Mazzone's posting earlier today. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 10:12 am
On the blog Balkinization, professors Jason Mazzone and Sandy Levinson engaged in a heated discussion as to the proper interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda. [read post]
28 Jan 2012, 6:07 am
EPA case, SCOTUS will decide which EPA enforcement actions if any should escape judicial review [Ilya Shapiro/Cato, Adler, Root] Keystone XL episode gives reason to revisit NEPA [Conn Carroll] Ninth Circuit ruling on forest road runoff will test Obama position [David Freddoso] Debate at Point of Law on President’s recess appointment power between Jason Mazzone and Andrew M. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 10:12 am
On the blog Balkinization, professors Jason Mazzone and Sandy Levinson engaged in a heated discussion as to the proper interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda. [read post]
18 Aug 2010, 6:50 am
In brief, here are today’s stories on the Supreme Court: At Balkinization, Jason Mazzone summarizes his research on Supreme Court review of state court decisions. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 8:01 am
The illustration -- as Jason Mazzone could tell you -- is of Fort Hill, John C. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 6:49 am
Marder View Article Batson Remedies by Jason Mazzone View Article Policing the Borders of Democracy: The Continuing Role of Batson in Protecting the Citizenship Rights of the Excluded by Melynda J. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 7:54 pm
A few more:Brooklyn Law's Jason Mazzone asks, "Is the use fair? [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 10:54 am
Also at the New York Times, Jason Mazzone has an opinion piece on the challenges to health-care reform in which he concludes that “Judge Hudson’s analysis could prove irresistible to the Supreme Court and that there is a reasonable chance it will agree that the insurance mandate is invalid. [read post]
