Search for: "Application of Mueller"
Results 1 - 20
of 708
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2017, 10:04 pm
Let the chips fall where they may, the application is clear: Mueller cannot remain as Special Counsel. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 2:29 pm
The Justice Department announced that it will file a petition for a writ of certiorari in In re Application of the Committee on the Judiciary, the Judiciary Committee’s effort to obtain grand jury material relevant to the Mueller Report. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 11:01 am
A couple of caveats at the outset: We assume here for purposes of argument that the Mueller report will be factually rich, that it will both lay out detailed factual findings and analyze those factual findings under applicable law. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 12:02 pm
Mueller House 20190930 (PDF)Mueller House 20190930 (Text) [read post]
1 Jan 2018, 7:00 am
The investigation is guided by a set of Justice Department regulations that Rosenstein deemed “applicable to the Special Counsel” in his appointment Order. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 4:00 am
It stated that the special counsel regulations “are applicable to the Special Counsel,” and not to Rosenstein. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 7:13 am
Or as Mueller put it: "The Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated—including some associated with the Trump Campaign—deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. [read post]
10 Mar 2020, 10:52 am
The House Judiciary Committee had filed an application on July 26, 2019, for an order authorizing the release of certain grand jury materials that were redacted in the version of the Mueller report presented to members of Congress and the public. [read post]
4 May 2019, 11:50 am
He also “may determine” (my emphasis) that “public release of these reports would be in the public interest” if he complies with “applicable legal restrictions. [read post]
22 Mar 2018, 5:23 am
§§509, 510, and 515, and then pursuant to these authorities made “Sections 600.4 through 600.l0 of Title 28 … applicable to the Special Counsel. [read post]
1 Apr 2019, 9:13 am
1 RCFP APPLICATION (PDF)1 RCFP APPLICATION (Text) [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 6:00 am
On Lawfare, Jack Goldsmith and Josh Blackman have argued that Mueller’s application of the obstruction statutes to presidential conduct facially authorized by Article II is deeply flawed. [read post]
24 Jul 2019, 6:34 pm
Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment,” close quote. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 4:37 pm
Schwinn, John Marshall Law School Among its many findings and conclusions, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report concluded that the Constitution does not prohibit the application of federal obstruction-of-justice laws to the president, even when the president is executing... [read post]
17 Nov 2009, 4:10 am
Professor Janice Mueller & Daniel Brean have posted a new working-draft article on design patent protection. [read post]
17 Nov 2009, 4:10 am
Professor Janice Mueller & Daniel Brean have posted a new working-draft article on design patent protection. [read post]
16 Apr 2018, 9:30 pm
Will the President appoint someone to replace Mueller? [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 1:49 pm
" However, the Justice Department indicated that no additional indictments are expected from Mueller, whose investigation has already resulted in numerous indictments and prosecutions (see an overview at The New York Times).The full report of the Mueller investigation remains confidential, although Barr acknowledges the high level of public interest in the contents and pledges "to release as much of the Special Counsel's report as I can consistent with… [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 7:36 am
"From "Does Mueller Indictment Mean Clinton Campaign Can Be Indicted for Chris Steele? [read post]
23 May 2019, 7:08 am
Neither Wittes nor Lederman nor Kent defends this central element of Mueller’s argument for the application of the obstruction statutes to the president’s Article II activities. [read post]
