Search for: "APPLICATION OF ANDERSON"
Results 21 - 40
of 1,802
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Feb 2024, 2:16 pm
Anderson. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 3:33 pm
Anderson was the extent to which the Justices coalesced around a single, shared federalism concern that wasn’t a prominent topic in the many briefs filed with the Court. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 12:24 pm
Anderson, 403 So. 2d 397, 400 (Fla. 1981)). [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 9:51 am
Anderson, and the discussion ranged from examining the applicability of obscure Reconstruction-era court decisions to the impact that upholding the Colorado decision might have on the 2024 presidential election. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 12:46 pm
Thomas looked to the history of the 14th Amendment, where he asked for modern examples of how this amendment applies beyond its previous application to former Confederates in the aftermath of the Civil War. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 9:20 am
Anderson.] [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 3:03 am
Anderson to press. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 8:12 am
The case centers around the application of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution—a section frequently referred to as the Insurrection Clause. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 7:57 am
Statement to be submitted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, accredited under operative paragraph No. 9 of UN General Assembly Resolution 75/282, on behalf of 124 signatories. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 5:19 am
Anderson litigation, both the Colorado District and the Colorado Supreme Court found Section Three to be justiciable and Trump has not pressed a political question argument in his Supreme Court merits briefs. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 3:36 pm
As I explained in one of my earlier posts, several or all of the Justices might be inclined to decide the case on some ground that doesn’t require the Court to decide whether Donald Trump is eligible to be President, if such an “off-ramp” solution is legally available. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 7:35 am
Anderson, is chock full of issues surrounding the applicability of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the former president. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 7:20 am
But Lash then assumes that any reading of the text that might extend its application beyond these supposedly limited historical purposes must therefore be considered "unclear" or "ambiguous. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 8:15 am
Anderson. [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 6:29 pm
Part II of Donald Trump’s brief argues that the factual predicate for the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to remove Trump’s name from the primary ballot was absent because Trump did not “engage in” an insurrection against the United States on January 6, 2021.[1] [Apologies in advance about all the footnotes, but I didn't want to clutter the text with too many peripheral matters.]The Colorado Supreme Court held that Trump’s words on January 6… [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 5:57 pm
Anderson” is based on a serious mistake. [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 1:01 pm
Anderson have pivoted to a new strategy. [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 11:30 am
If the faithful, straightforward interpretation and application of Section Three would risk these consequences, we should not interpret and apply the Constitution faithfully. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am
In one of my previous posts, I explained why it's unlikely that a majority of the Justices will hold that the Fourteenth Amendment bars Donald Trump from holding federal office. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 6:51 am
Anderson (2024): “In our democracy, we must trust the people, not unelected judges, to choose our leaders. [read post]
