Search for: "Davis v. Superintendent" Results 1 - 20 of 34
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am by Marty Lederman
  The short version is that it’s a stone-cold loser, not least because it would have absurd ramifications (such as that it would mean Jefferson Davis would’ve been disqualified from serving in virtually any federal or state office except the presidency and vice-presidency, and that the Foreign Emoluments Clause wouldn’t prohibit the President, Vice-President, and members of Congress from accepting titles, offices, gifts or emoluments from foreign… [read post]
28 Oct 2020, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
The notion that federal courts should be the superintendents of state law is deeply wrong and disrespectful to basic notions of federalism. [read post]
27 Dec 2019, 7:55 am
” This overbroad formulation is a far cry from the definition set forth by the Supreme Court in Davis v. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
National/Federal Campaigns Say They’ll Match Political Contributions. [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 11:24 am by Rick Esenberg
” In 1986, after years of confused and contradictory litigation in the lower courts, the Supreme Court affirmed the possibility of political-gerrymandering claims in Davis v. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 1:25 am by INFORRM
On 20 January 2017, Sir Davie Eady heard applications in the case of Daryanani -v- Ramnani. [read post]
18 Dec 2016, 4:19 pm by INFORRM
 heard 29 and 30 November and 1 December 2016 the Court of Appeal (Macfarlane, Davis and Sharp LJJ). [read post]