Search for: "Howard Wasserman" Results 401 - 420 of 600
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jan 2014, 6:06 am by Dan Markel
I'll be there later this afternoon to present a 7 minute version of my paper with Howard Wasserman and Michael McCann called, Catalyzing Fans. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 4:12 am by Edith Roberts
At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman discusses last week’s oral argument in Ziglar v. [read post]
14 Dec 2007, 8:34 am
[UPDATE: Views offered by several commenters below, including Howard Wasserman and Michael Risch, persuade me that this could be hearsay. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 8:01 am by Andrew Breidenbach
  At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman expresses doubt that the statute will pass constitutional muster, but in a second post he offers a reluctant defense of the revised statute. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 3:46 am by Edith Roberts
Howard Wasserman has this blog’s analysis of Wednesday’s oral argument in McDonough v. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 3:36 am by Amy Howe
  And at PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman predicts that “Kagan being ‘conflicted’ about this will not  move the needle at all, [because] . . . the collegiality norms on the Court mean that, as long as one Justice remains strongly opposed to cameras, the rest of the Justices are never going to push the issue. [read post]
22 Jan 2019, 3:50 am by Edith Roberts
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman suggests that last week’s oral argument in Home Depot U.S.A. [read post]
18 Nov 2015, 2:54 am by Amy Howe
”  And at PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman discusses Scalia’s remarks in an unrecorded speech at Princeton – in which, according to a Princeton faculty member who opposes same-sex marriage, Scalia “declared that though Supreme Court rulings should generally be obeyed, officials had no Constitutional obligation to treat as binding beyond the parties to a case rulings that lack a warrant in the text or original understanding of the Constitution. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 4:58 am by Amy Howe
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman discusses standing and a question left open by Monday’s decision in Susan B. [read post]
22 Jul 2012, 5:34 pm by Alfred Brophy
 I'm sure Steve Clowney, Tom Russell, Howard Wasserman, and a bunch of other law profs are going to be analyzing this for a while. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 4:21 am by Edith Roberts
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman assesses “who within or around the Court comes out ahead and who behind in” the Garland nomination “debacle”; in the first category he points to Justice Elena Kagan, who “might have been the intellectual center of a liberal Court,” and he includes Chief Justice John Roberts, who “avoids the prospect of being a Chief regularly in the minority and assigning dissents rather than majority… [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 9:45 pm by Jeff Schmitt
Howard Wasserman suggests that, because the Court hears so few cases, it should do a better job of selecting cases that provide a vehicle for rulemaking to guide the lower Courts. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 2:09 pm by Will Baude
Morales-Santana:] Howard Wasserman and Ian Samuel have both posted about Monday’s opinion in Sessions v. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 1:33 pm
Somin's post prompted a bunch of comments, which, along with this post at PrawfsBlawg by Howard Wasserman, Blocher to write again over at PrawfsBlawg. [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 4:22 am by Amy Howe
Commentary comes from Howard Wasserman, who discusses the timing for a successor at PrawfsBlawg; from Kent Scheidegger, who criticizes the record of Judge Jane Kelly in capital cases at Crime and Consequences; and in an op-ed for USA Today, where Eric Wang argues that, although we “may not know for sure exactly what Scalia would have thought about the merits of the arguments now being made about who should appoint his successor,” “we do know what he would have… [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 7:26 am
  One doesn't become an accomplice to a crime because some nutjob in the audience, boiling over with rage and righteous indignation, decides to make a left turn toward harming the other candidate instead of a right turn into the voting booth.At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman confronts the ugly lawyer tendency to frame issues in terms of law, distinguishing ugly rhetoric from criminal conduct. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 7:20 am by Erin Miller
Muchnick, Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg praises the opinion for getting a jurisdictional issue “just right and in a straight-forward way, with a minimum of complications or confusion. [read post]
12 May 2014, 4:40 am by Amy Howe
’”  In another post at PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman responds to Garnett’s post, acknowledging that “[i]t is an open question when, exactly, an establishment occurs (which is Rick’s point),” but adding that “it is not as simple as Kennedy suggests in saying ‘you can always express your own views’–the government’s involvement changes the metric. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 3:06 am by Amy Howe
 Commentary comes from Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times, NPR’s To the Point (audio), Steven Mazie in an explainer for The Economist, Amy Davidson at The New Yorker, Noah Feldman at Bloomberg View, Erwin Chemerinsky at ACSblog, Janson Wu at ACSblog, Suzanne Goldberg at ACSblog, Jeffrey Toobin in The New Yorker, David Fontana and Donald Braman in The Washington Post, Judith Schaeffer in USA Today, Gene Schaerr at The Daily Signal (who had another post there earlier this week), Ryan… [read post]