Search for: "Roberts v. Louisiana" Results 121 - 140 of 894
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2021, 6:29 am by Will Baude
Louisiana, ending the practice of allowing non-unanimous juries to convict defendants of crimes—and again in the Court's refusal to make that decision retroactive in Edwards v. [read post]
25 May 2021, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
At the time, Chief Justice John Roberts surprised many observers by joining his liberal colleagues in striking down a Louisiana law that was materially indistinguishable from a Texas law the Court had invalidated just two years earlier, despite the fact that Roberts himself had dissented in the Texas case. [read post]
Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote, but he stated in a separate concurrence that he only went with the majority to honor the precedent set in an earlier case, Whole Women’s Health v. [read post]
17 May 2021, 8:55 am by Amy Howe
In that case, five justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, relied on Casey in ruling that the Louisiana law imposed an undue burden on the right to obtain a pre-viability abortion. [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 11:04 am by Eugene Volokh
Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 349 (1974), which limits presumed damages in libel cases brought by private figures? [read post]
12 Feb 2021, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Van Grack was a lead prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
            Abortion and the Law in America was published last spring, shortly before the Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s admitting-privileges law in June Medical Services v. [read post]
1 Feb 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Roberts’s invocation of stare decisis per Whole Woman’s Health v. [read post]
24 Dec 2020, 11:05 am by Josh Blackman
Supreme Court, from 1894 until his death, saw him vote in the majority in Plessy v. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 8:34 am by Eugene Volokh
Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 349 (1974), which limits presumed damages in libel cases brought by private figures? [read post]