Search for: "Kent Scheidegger"
Results 501 - 520
of 622
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2010, 6:21 am
” (Kent Scheidegger at Crime & Consequences endorses Lyle’s reading of the argument.) [read post]
28 May 2014, 4:19 am
Commentary on the decision comes from Noah Feldman, who argues at Bloomberg View that, “[o]n closer examination . . . the decision is less satisfying than it appears”; from Kent Scheidegger at Crime and Consequences, who observes that there “is already a movement afoot to remove IQ ceilings from the definition of intellectual disability altogether” and argues that the movement “must not succeed” in the context of eligibility for the death… [read post]
19 Dec 2007, 8:07 am
Kent Scheidegger, a prominent death penalty proponent who is legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, said the number of death sentences is falling because the number of murders is declining. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 4:13 am
I published my Plain English preview of the case yesterday at this blog, while in his Sidebar column for The New York Times Adam Liptak looks at the standing issue in the case and Kent Scheidegger does the same at Crime and Consequences. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 7:20 am
I covered the argument for this blog; other coverage comes from Kent Scheidegger at Crime and Consequences. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 4:57 am
” And Kent Scheidegger discusses the issues in the case in a podcast for the Federalist Society. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 9:26 am
Our own Kent Scheidegger disagrees with the Graham decision and "extending it to homicides would be wrong squared. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 7:19 am
Responding to criticism by Dahlia Lithwick and Lisa McElroy in the New York Times (which Kiera covered in Friday’s round-up), Kent Scheidegger countered at Crime and Consequences that “[u]nexplained denials are, of course, standard operating procedure at the discretionary review stage. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 6:45 am
Other coverage comes from USA Today, the Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, CNN, JURIST, AP, and Kent Scheidegger of Crime and Consequences; at ACSblog, Brandon Garrett compares the decision in Perry to the Court’s decision earlier this week in Smith v. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 11:01 am
CJLF legal director Kent Scheidegger agrees with other legal experts that the plan is "dismantling a system that was carefully put together over time," and fears the defense bar may even try to use the measure to gut the three-strikes law. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 12:21 pm
" Attorneys for death row inmates argue that the problem is not fixable; though CJLF legal director Kent Scheidegger emphasizes the state of Virginia's success in fixing their system and the execution of the D.C. sniper in less than six years. [read post]
12 Oct 2016, 4:28 am
Amy Howe reports on the decision for this blog; commentary comes from Kent Scheidegger at Crime and Consequences. [read post]
5 Nov 2015, 4:43 am
News) covered the stay, while Kent Scheidegger weighs in at Crime and Consequences. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 8:14 am
Kent Scheidegger of Crime and Consequences criticizes a recent Los Angeles Times article on Justice Thomas (to which Nabiha linked in yesterday’s round-up) as “skewed . . . to give the reader a distorted view of [the Justice’s] jurisprudence. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 7:30 am
Kent Scheidegger at the blog Crime and Consequences also discusses Hill and Dorsey, commenting on a recent New York Times article on the cases, which Nabiha included in yesterday’s round-up. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 3:40 am
At Crime & Consequences, Kent Scheidegger hopes that the Supreme Court will move quickly to replace Mathena v. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 9:59 pm
------------------*Kent Scheidegger disagrees. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 3:12 am
Unfortunately, party-pooper Kent Scheidegger, co-blogger with Otis, points out in the first comment that the list is a meaningless scam. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 9:05 am
*Still, when Kent Scheidegger and I both agree that a law is unconstitutional, there's some likelihood that we're right. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 4:02 am
” Kent Scheidegger weighs in at Crime & Consequences on the court’s refusal to exercise its original jurisdiction to consider the dispute, agreeing with Justice Clarence Thomas, who dissented from the order, that the court’s discretionary approach to these cases may violate the Constitution. [read post]
