Search for: "Nelson v. Powers" Results 121 - 140 of 570
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2020, 9:50 am by Jon Sands
Nelson accuses the panel of adopting broad supervisory power over the state court rather than the narrow legal standard of deference under AEDPA. [read post]
20 Aug 2020, 8:00 am by ernst
That taxonomy may have influenced the Supreme Court’s analysis of patents in Oil States Energy Services v. [read post]
12 Aug 2020, 5:01 am by Rachael Hanna
On July 20, the Ninth Circuit declined to rehear en banc Fazaga v. [read post]
2 Aug 2020, 9:01 pm by Austin Sarat
Austin Sarat is Associate Provost, Associate Dean of the Faculty and William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 6:09 am by Nelson Tebbe
Lawrence Sager & Nelson Tebbe This fall, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Fulton v. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 12:42 pm by fjhinojosa
Beyer was recently mentioned in Hunter, Jr. v. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 2:51 pm by Jane S. Schacter
Jane Schacter is the William Nelson Cromwell professor of law at Stanford Law School. [read post]
24 Jun 2020, 9:01 pm by Austin Sarat
Austin Sarat is Associate Provost, Associate Dean of the Faculty and William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. [read post]
7 Jun 2020, 1:17 am by Schachtman
Although such licensure suspensions or revocations for “testimonial misadventures” remain rare, the Lustgarten case illustrates that Medical Boards have the power to police medico-legal testimony.[4] Medical societies, although voluntary, may have considerable influence on teaching and hospital privileges and positions. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 6:26 am by Kalvis Golde
Topic: separation of powers Audience: middle school Chiafalo v. [read post]
27 Mar 2020, 1:30 pm by Guest Blogger
Indeed, as Nelson Tebbe observes in his symposium contribution (and as he fleshes out in more detail in noteworthy earlier work), the government’s “capacity to alter the standing of subjects, and to impede their participation in public life, may be more (and differently) powerful than that of others. [read post]