Search for: "Farrand v. Farrand"
Results 1 - 20
of 29
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Feb 2024, 2:04 pm
[The issues, arguments, and evidence raised by Mikhail have already been addressed by extant scholarship, including our scholarship. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 8:57 am
” 1 Farrand 63, 67. [read post]
10 Feb 2024, 11:12 pm
During oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
10 Feb 2024, 10:28 pm
See 1 Farrand's Records at xv. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 6:30 am
This post was prepared for a roundtable on Civic Education, convened as part of LevinsonFest 2022—a year-long series gathering scholars from diverse disciplines and viewpoints to reflect on Sandy Levinson’s influential work in constitutional law. [read post]
11 Oct 2022, 5:01 am
Willson v. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
~Thomas Jefferson, 1789 To underscore these points, the Framers provided in Article V, not just one but two methods (and four paths) for amendment. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 12:37 pm
Term Limits, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Aug 2021, 9:03 pm
Qi Andrew and Gucci America v. [read post]
29 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
Before responding to some of the questions and concerns raised in these remarkable essays, please allow me a moment to note how positively the reviewers responded to the collection: “Kurt Lash now stands alongside Max Farrand in doing extraordinary work to further constitutional knowledge by making a critical portion of our past more accessible. [read post]
16 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
” Professor Avins and the Commission were convinced that Brown v. [read post]
25 May 2020, 6:30 am
The other is that Texas v. [read post]
11 Aug 2019, 9:20 am
“[United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 10:48 am
This amazing legal linguistics resource was recently cited by Justice Thomas in his dissent to Carpenter v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 7:57 am
On the Farrand article it is clear that neither of the parties argued in support of the property law analysis, so it would have been a stretch for the court to take that line. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 4:05 pm
In its motion to dismiss in CREW et al. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 4:04 pm
In its motion to dismiss in CREW et al. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 4:16 am
Trump cannot withstand scrutiny.In its motion to dismiss in CREW et al. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 6:38 am
” This statement sounds very much like the interpretive principle underlying one of John Marshall’s most famous remarks in McCulloch v. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 5:17 am
’” 3Mazer v. [read post]
