Search for: "Matter of Barrett"
Results 1 - 20
of 1,338
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 May 2024, 5:45 am
A second concurrence--by Justice Kagan joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, and Barrett--is a bit more puzzling. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am
By Guest Blogger Tyler Ochoa Last week, the U.S. [read post]
7 May 2024, 2:47 pm
What about state court proceedings, or acquittals involving juvenile courts or tribal matters? [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 5:51 am
When Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted that, under Trump’s proposed rule, even a president who staged a military coup couldn’t be prosecuted “if there was not a statute that expressly referenced the president,” Trump’s counsel, Sauer, agreed that this traitorous president could escape prosecution (it’s at p. 57 of the transcript). [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 3:26 pm
While the Court refused to do so, Justices Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett said they were reserving judgment on the issue while the USSC studied the matter. [read post]
27 Apr 2024, 2:40 pm
., almost the entire criminal code--then a President would not be prohibited by statute from perjuring himself under oath about official matters; from corruptly altering, destroying or concealing documents to prevent them from being used in an official proceeding; from suborning others to commit perjury; from bribing witnesses or public officials; from threatening witnesses; from polling members of the armed forces about their confidential electoral votes; from attempting to intimidate,… [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 11:05 am
However, SCOTUS will strike the rule down on one of two grounds: Either: MQD grounds because it is retroactive, because the rule affects the contracts of 30 million, because contracts are perceived to be largely a matter of state law, and because employment is not the FTC’s ‘wheelhouse. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 4:53 am
In contrast, the court’s liberal three justices as well as Justice Amy Coney Barrett stressed that a president is not above the law. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 2:49 pm
Kagan pressed Evangelis to explain how, as a practical matter, a necessity defense would work in the case of people who are homeless. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Speaking through Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Justices elaborated upon their less constricted version of the “authority or duty” test in a way that provides some guidance to government officials. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 2:44 pm
S. ___ (2021) (BARRETT, J., concurring in denial of application for injunctive rel [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 11:02 am
Both of these important writings reflect a lot of careful thought and attention on a matter of public concern. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 7:49 am
That matters, and not only because we may be more despondent than the facts justify. [read post]
17 Apr 2024, 7:16 am
With the possible exception of Justice Barrett, the conservatives were skeptical of what they call a broad reading of a criminal law and apparently want to narrow it by deploying a canon that sounds in purposivism, while the liberals seemed to take the opposite view. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 12:46 pm
[No matter how you slice it, Smith cannot exercise the powers he purports to exercise.] [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 6:49 am
Two justices (Kavanaugh, joined by Barrett) concurred in the stay, and spoke primarily to how the Court should think about stays of lower-court injunctions. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 1:18 am
As a matter of fact, I did some research last year and I talked to a few of the paralegals here who suggested I learn everything that I can about XYZ. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 9:30 pm
Barrett and Henry “Hank” M. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 11:33 am
Justice Barrett's opinion today in Sheetz v. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 7:06 am
Categorizing conduct, therefore, can require a close look,” Justice Barrett wrote. [read post]
