Search for: "Marty Lederman" Results 21 - 40 of 689
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jun 2020, 10:39 am by Matt Gluck, Tia Sewell
Jack Goldsmith and Marty Lederman assessed this government lawsuit. [read post]
19 Jun 2020, 3:01 pm by Matt Gluck
Jack Goldsmith and Marty Lederman offered questions for Judge Royce Lamberth to ask the government during a hearing considering a government motion in the case regarding John Bolton’s new memoir. [read post]
18 Jun 2020, 1:32 pm by Eugene Volokh
Jack Goldsmith & Marty Lederman at Just Security; it's a factually and legally complicated area, which I don't know enough about, but on which they are experts. [read post]
18 Jun 2020, 1:15 pm by Tia Sewell
ICYMI: Yesterday on Lawfare Jack Goldsmith and Marty Lederman assessed the U.S. government’s civil suit against former National Security Adviser John Bolton. [read post]
29 May 2020, 9:52 pm by Eugene Volokh
Marty Lederman (Georgetown) for the pointer; he also adds that California offered this justification for the distinction in its brief: In the view of state public-health officials, large public gatherings pose a heightened risk of spread because attendees are "stationary in close quarters for extended periods of time. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 7:56 am by Michael C. Dorf
" Yet, as I explained in a Verdict column, the dissenters were rightly baffled by the majority's invocation of this supposed failure, because Wisconsin law does not contain a mailing deadline, only a receipt deadline (as Marty Lederman elaborated in point 5 here). [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 4:00 am by Edith Roberts
” At Balkinization, Marty Lederman unpacks the opinion, concluding that “the Supreme Court just stayed a provision of a district court preliminary injunction that does not exist, and in so doing imposed a restraint on the franchise of Wisconsin voters that Wisconsin law itself doesn’t require. [read post]
16 Mar 2020, 8:36 am by Michael C. Dorf
Marty Lederman, suggested that the dangerous precedent of habeas suspension would be unnecessary because the underlying order would be lawful and any rogue judge or court that held otherwise would be swiftly reversed by the SCOTUS before an injunction of the lockdown went into effect. [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 7:56 am by Howard Bashman
And on Twitter, law professor Marty Lederman offers this response to Blackman’s essay. [read post]
15 Jan 2020, 4:11 am by Edith Roberts
” At Balkinization, Marty Lederman weighs in on two requests for expedited review of a lower court ruling that the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate is unconstitutional, arguing that “the Court ought to grant the petitions (and thus the motions to expedite) because of the stratagem that two judges on the Fifth Circuit employed here and the foreseeable effects their manipulations will have. [read post]
21 Dec 2019, 8:43 am by David Pozen
”   For instance, they might conclude, for the sorts of reasons Marty Lederman has discussedon this blog, that “impartiality” must be understood loosely, perhaps even aspirationally, in the inherently politicized impeachment context. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 3:44 am by Edith Roberts
” At Balkinization, Marty Lederman remarks on how the briefing in a landmark 1926 Supreme Court case involving “whether Congress can give the Senate a role in the removal of an inferior officer” shows “how very different Supreme Court practice is today than it was a century ago. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
Marty Lederman observed last night in a Twitter thread that quotes an 1846 statement by President James K. [read post]
27 Nov 2019, 3:21 am by Edith Roberts
At Balkinization, Marty Lederman addresses “the importance of the … cases[,] the weakness of Trump’s constitutional arguments … and … what the Court is likely to do with those two cases. [read post]
26 Nov 2019, 5:37 am by Howard Bashman
“Understanding the two Mazars subpoena cases pending in the Supreme Court”: Marty Lederman has this post at the “Balkinization” blog. [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 4:17 am by Edith Roberts
” At Balkinization, Marty Lederman offers “some thoughts on three issues the Justices and defendants’ advocates raised. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
As Prof Marty Lederman explained in a blog post last month, the framing of the cases as involving categorical policies excluding LGBT persons from employment is wrong on the facts, but he also argued (and I agree) that if the cases are framed that way the plaintiffs still should win. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 4:00 am by Michael C. Dorf
Accordingly, rather than attempt to answer the question in all its dimensions, I want to focus on one aspect of the underlying politics: whether Trump and his minions can get away with their apparent strategy of denying the existence of the smoking gun--the readout of Trump's phone call with Volodymyr Zelensky.In a devastating article in The Atlantic, Marty Lederman and Ben Wittes explain why the phone call readout--even standing alone--shows Trump to be utterly unfit to… [read post]