Search for: "Randy E. Barnett" Results 221 - 240 of 269
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Sep 2020, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
You can reach her by e-mail at zeisberg@umich.edu [read post]
31 Dec 2016, 11:15 am
Our Republican Constitution: Securing the Liberty and Sovereignty of We the People by Randy E. [read post]
2 Jan 2017, 1:13 pm
Our Republican Constitution: Securing the Liberty and Sovereignty of We the People by Randy E. [read post]
5 Jan 2008, 7:56 am
Randy E, Barnett (Georgetown) is first and begins by discussing Gonzales v. [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 7:00 am by Josh Blackman
In two previous posts, Randy Barnett and I explained that NFIB v. [read post]
7 May 2007, 9:54 am
Kurt Lash, The Inescapable Federalism of the Ninth Amendment (A Reply to Randy Barnett), __ Iowa Law Review (2008). [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 9:54 am
Kurt Lash, The Inescapable Federalism of the Ninth Amendment (A Reply to Randy Barnett), __ Iowa Law Review (2008). [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 10:10 pm by Ilya Somin
Partly, it was co-blogger Randy Barnett’s insightful analysis of the issue in this December 2009 paper coauthored with Todd Gaziano and Nathaniel Stewart. [read post]
18 Mar 2020, 3:00 pm by Josh Blackman
Randy Barnett and I designed our 100 Supreme Court Cases Video Library for the flipped classroom. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 2:15 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
I welcome a system in which it will be easier to confirm the likes of Jane Kelly, Bill Pryor, Pam Karlan and Randy Barnett. [read post]
25 Aug 2011, 6:20 am by Robert A. Levy
 (I draw here from a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Randy Barnett, who litigated the Raich case.) [read post]
2 Apr 2010, 12:38 am by David Kopel
Randy Barnett, Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty (2005). [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 3:00 am by Marty Lederman
My colleague Randy Barnett—co-counsel for the individual respondents—has helpfully published a recent post in which he elaborates upon some of the respondents’ arguments against the constitutionality of the insurance-maintenance provision of the ACA, section 5000A; so I thought I’d take this occasion to provide a few reactions to those arguments, and to more fully explain how the issues have been teed up to the Court. [read post]