Search for: "Application of Barrett"
Results 1 - 20
of 952
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Apr 2024, 11:05 am
One respondent said: “Seems like a pretty routine application of the major questions doctrine as to whether the FTC has the rulemaking power it claims to have. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 3:45 pm
A lot of the protections that you're talking about are internal protections that the federal government has, protections in the Department of Justice, which obviously are not applicable at the many, many, many, many state and local jurisdictions across the country.6. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 3:14 pm
The unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, found “[n]othing in constitutional text, history or precedent supports exempting legislatures from ordinary takings rules. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Speaking through Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Justices elaborated upon their less constricted version of the “authority or duty” test in a way that provides some guidance to government officials. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 2:44 pm
S. ___ (2021) (BARRETT, J., concurring in denial of application for injunctive rel [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 11:02 am
A to Application for Stay 52–54. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 9:47 am
And how about this gaffe: The Trump Campaign at first appears to adopt this exception, including it in its recitation of the applicable law and confusingly citing Barrett v. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 7:16 am
With the possible exception of Justice Barrett, the conservatives were skeptical of what they call a broad reading of a criminal law and apparently want to narrow it by deploying a canon that sounds in purposivism, while the liberals seemed to take the opposite view. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 6:49 am
Two justices (Kavanaugh, joined by Barrett) concurred in the stay, and spoke primarily to how the Court should think about stays of lower-court injunctions. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 4:00 am
In choosing such an extraordinary remedy, the district court clearly strayed from equity’s traditional bounds.Justice Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Barrett, filed a concurring opinion, saying in part:Traditionally, one important factor when this Court decides an emergency application involving a new law is likelihood of success on the merits. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 3:38 pm
” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote his own 13-page concurring opinion, joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in which he focused on how the court should deal with emergency applications in cases – like this one – involving efforts to block enforcement of a new state or federal law. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 11:04 pm
Which brings us to a quick review of applicable regulatory takings law. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 11:33 am
Justice Barrett's opinion today in Sheetz v. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 5:31 pm
If Justice Barrett and others are troubled by circuit courts granted administrative stays, then Judge Oldham's reform would be quite helpful. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 6:00 am
The MBDA directed its business centers to forgo racial considerations when vetting applicants. [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 3:35 pm
“Shouldn’t the FDA have at least considered the application of 18 U.S.C. 1461? [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 5:17 am
As noted, Justice Barrett (and Justice Kavanaugh) seemed to think that review of an administrative stay is simply unavailable. [read post]
21 Mar 2024, 3:19 am
As Justice Amy Coney Barrett seemingly implied during the Murthy v. [read post]
20 Mar 2024, 7:57 am
More emergency applications arriving at the Supreme Court filed by the Department of Justice. [read post]
20 Mar 2024, 7:14 am
The Fifth Circuit’s March 2 Order and the Applications to SCOTUS Enter, the Fifth Circuit. [read post]
