Search for: "Howard Wasserman"
Results 481 - 500
of 549
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jun 2015, 4:43 am
Still more commentary comes from Kenneth Jost at Jost on Justice; from Adam Winkler at the Huffington Post; at PrawfsBlawg, where posts come from Richard Re, Howard Wasserman (who has four posts on the decision and how it is being implemented), Paul Horwitz, Rick Hills, and Hadar Aviram; from Karl Laird at the Oxford Human Rights Hub; at the Human Rights at Home Blog from Noah Novogrodsky; and from John Culhane for POLITICO. [read post]
13 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman ponders some process-oriented questions raised by Vance and Mazars and discusses potential implications for future cases. [read post]
21 May 2010, 7:19 am
” Howard Wasserman responds to Fontana’s article on PrawfsBlawg, saying “[t]he whole piece is worth a read” but that he is unconvinced by Fontana’s description of a lack of eligible liberals to serve as federal judges. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 4:15 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman remarks that “[t]he opinions seemed to look at different facts triggering different analyses. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 6:05 am
United States, where a defendant was convicted of violating Sarbanes-Oxley’s ‘anti-shredding’ prohibition by throwing illegally caught fish off his boat”; Ruthann Robson at Constitutional Law Prof Blog, who summarizes the case as one in which, “[i]n a nutshell, the Court concludes that the federal prosecutors exceeded the power the statute gave them . . . and thus there is no need to decide whether Congress exceeded the power the Constitution’s treaty and… [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 4:40 am
” At Prawfsblawgs, Howard Wasserman argues in favor of a filibuster by Senate Democrats, but notes that “the framing of the strategy is going to be essential” and that “the Democrats need to find their own principle beyond tit-for-tat. [read post]
5 Apr 2020, 3:47 am
Howard Wasserman raises some questions about the efficacy of online teaching. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 5:33 am
Commentary on the case comes from Ruthann Robson at Constitutional Law Prof Blog, who writes that the Court’s “relatively short and unanimous opinion breaks no new ground”; from Garrett Epps of The Atlantic, who predicts that both the Ohio law at issue in the case and other similar laws will “go down in the next few years”; from Lisa Soronen at the blog of the National Conference of State Legislatures, who observes that the case “should be of more interest… [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 4:28 am
It started at PrawfsBlawg, with lawprof Howard Wasserman free-riding the coattails of Cornell lawprof Mike Dorf, with the Wass-man noting “Mike share [sic] my view that cameras are a good idea but not a panacea. [read post]
29 May 2018, 4:13 am
” Howard Wasserman shares his impressions of “RBG,” the new documentary about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at PrawfsBlawg. [read post]
15 Jun 2018, 4:30 am
” Additional commentary comes from the First Amendment Blog, Jennifer Tiedemann at the Goldwater Institute, Adav Noti at Take Care, Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, and Richard Hasen at Slate, who concludes that “the opinion shows a more realistic and functional understanding of the political process than the court has shown in campaign finance cases. [read post]
5 May 2020, 3:54 am
” Additional commentary comes from Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, who remarks that “[t]he big difference” from in-person arguments “is that the Justices were less the stars,” Josh Blackman at Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy blog (via How Appealing), Elie Mystal at The Nation, and the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, which observes that the unprecedented teleconference format offered “a great chance for the public to witness the… [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 6:54 am
Writing at PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman considers the opinion’s discussion of issues of jurisdiction versus issues of substantive law, while Andy Spalding predicts that, after Kiobel, “the next generation of ATS litigation . . . will likely focus to a large extent on the territorial nexus question. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 4:31 am
Howard Wasserman previewed the case for this blog. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 9:01 pm
(And thanks to Howard Wasserman for prompting me to talk a little bit about this.) [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 5:02 pm
With the case being released on a Friday during Wimbledon (see Howard Wasserman's post below about the longest match in the history of professional tennis), most mainstream news outlets probably won't write about the case until next week. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 4:17 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman points out that Nieves v. [read post]
28 Apr 2012, 2:53 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman recognizes the validity of Goldberg's point (with the caveat that it's nothing new, which of course is true but fails to address the fact that it's not getting any better, and appears to be getting worse). [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 3:11 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman discusses the Court and alleged inconsistencies in its First Amendment jurisprudence in the context of “speech-protective” decisions like McCullen. [read post]
11 May 2020, 3:24 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman notes that “Justice Thomas called for reconsidering qualified immunity in his concurring opinion in Ziglar v. [read post]
