Search for: "Eric Segall"
Results 281 - 300
of 445
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2017, 8:14 am
Howard reviews Eric Segall’s article, Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal to Improve the United States Supreme Court, which is forthcoming in the Pepperdine Law... [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 7:31 am
Some further thoughts on Eric Segall's proposal for an eight-person, even-partisan-divided Supreme Court. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 6:04 am
I have the new Courts Law essay, reviewing Eric Segall's Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal to Improve the United States Supreme Court, which proposes codifying the current eight-Justice/even partisan divide on the Court. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 3:30 am
Eric J. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 6:48 pm
In early April, Pepperdine Law School is hosting a symposium focused on these issues, and, like Eric Segall and others, I have proposed a possible structural reform. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 11:36 am
Or that both sides agree to end the arms race and adopt Eric Segall's plan to hold the Court at eight. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 6:37 pm
Eric Segall's (Georgia State) piece in the LA Times, arguing that CREW has standing to sue President Trump for an Emoluments Clause violation. [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 8:48 am
" Law professor Eric Segall has posted this paper on SSRN (via "Legal Theory Blog"). [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 7:44 am
Truthmakerless constitutional theories like those of Judge Posner, Eric Segall or the early Felix Frankfurter cannot vindicate “wrong the day it was decided” (WTDIWD) data from the Court itself, and irreducibly plural constitutional theories like those of Philip Bobbitt cannot vindicate such data in cases where constitutional modes conflict. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 6:11 am
Segal, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, on Saturday, January 7, 2017 Tags: Boards of Directors, Compensation disclosure, Compensation guidelines, Compensation ratios, Compensation regulation, Director compensation, Dodd-Frank Act, Glass Lewis, ISS, Management, Proxy advisors, Say on frequency, Say on pay, Securities regulation, Taxation, Whistleblowers Sustainability Practices: 2016 Edition Posted by Matteo Tonello, The Conference Board, Inc., on Sunday, January 8, 2017 Tags:… [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 8:58 am
"Why Trump and the GOP Might not Want to Fill Scalia's Seat": Eric Segall has this post today at the "Dorf on Law" blog. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 6:50 am
Indiana – State Senator Introduces Ethics Bill to Ban All Gifts from LobbyistsWTHR – Bob Segall | Published: 1/3/2017 Indiana Sen. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 4:41 am
In any event, we provoked a sur-reply, by Richard Posner and Eric Segall, called “Faux Originalism. [read post]
17 Dec 2016, 10:18 am
"SCOTUS Term Limits in the Next Congress": Eric Segall and Gabe Roth have this post today at "Dorf on Law. [read post]
9 Dec 2016, 4:42 am
— via Eric Meyer’s The Employer Handbook Blog Exemption Rules Appeal Won’t Be Resolved Before Obama Leaves Office — via Wage & Hour Insights Ignoring the minimum wage is a big deal! [read post]
9 Dec 2016, 4:42 am
— via Eric Meyer’s The Employer Handbook Blog Exemption Rules Appeal Won’t Be Resolved Before Obama Leaves Office — via Wage & Hour Insights Ignoring the minimum wage is a big deal! [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 3:49 am
” At Dorf on Law, Eric Segall maintains that the conventional wisdom that Thomas is a pure originalist is a “myth,” arguing that “Thomas consistently reaches conservative results regardless of whether those results can be justified by reference to the actual words of the Constitution or their original meaning. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 2:02 pm
Segall has this essay online at The Los Angeles Times. [read post]
16 Oct 2016, 11:14 am
"Divided Government is Great so Why not for SCOTUS": Eric Segall has this post today at "Dorf on Law. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 4:33 am
” In The Conversation, Eric Segall takes issue with the tendency of “most court watchers” to deplore the current eight-member Supreme Court as “an incomplete, divided legal institution,” arguing that “the longer we have an evenly divided court, the more likely it will be the justices will act more modestly, and take more heed of Hamilton’s warning that they exercise ‘judgment’ not ‘will. [read post]
