Search for: "Thomas v. Null*" Results 1 - 20 of 438
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Apr 2024, 6:00 am by Lawrence Solum
 A statute that has been given an authoritative construction may only be binding "as construed," even if the construction is tantamount to judicial amendment or nullification of the statute. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm by admin
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 7:54 pm by Josh Blackman
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] On January 18, Professor Akhil Reed Amar and Professor Vikram Amar filed an amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 5:50 am by Michael C. Dorf
Dept. of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 8:24 am by Eric Goldman
Google–which remains in limbo after the Supreme Court’s remand of that case, and (3) Justice Thomas’ DISSENT to cert denial in the Malwarebytes v. [read post]
20 Oct 2023, 1:31 pm by Amy Howe
First, Divine contended, as the Supreme Court made clear in its 2021 decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. [read post]
28 Sep 2023, 4:00 am by Anil Kalhan
Ultimately, of course, the Supreme Court vacated the Trump administration’s rescission of DACA in 2020 when—by a 5-4 margin, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority—it decided Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 3:28 pm by Amy Howe
” Alito, joined by Thomas, also penned a statement regarding the denial of review in Thompson v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 6:19 am by Mark Graber
 Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. [read post]