Search for: "United States v. Anderson" Results 61 - 80 of 1,305
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
[Steven Calabresi] Trump v. Anderson, Professor Akhil Reed Amar, and the Constitutionality of the Presidential Succession Act
7 Feb 2024, 11:00 pm by Steven Calabresi
Term Limits v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
[Josh Blackman] All Blackman-Tillman Articles, Presentations, Amicus Briefs, Commentary, and Blog posts on Section 3 and Insurrection
7 Feb 2024, 7:47 pm by Josh Blackman
Tomorrow, on February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
[Josh Blackman] A Reply to Peter Keisler and Richard Bernstein, and Michael Luttig, on Section 3
7 Feb 2024, 7:45 pm by Josh Blackman
Anderson. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Part Nine: Ten Arguments that Petitioners Haven’t Raised (or that Trump Only Invoked Late in the Game)
7 Feb 2024, 6:25 pm by Marty Lederman
     That the presidency is not an “office, civil or military, under the United States” for purposes of the first, “Positions” Clause of Section 3. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Part Seven: Trump’s Two Remaining “Off-Ramp” Arguments: (i) That Colorado has Implemented a De Facto Extraconstitutional Presidential Qualification, in Violation of Term Limits v. Thornton; and (ii) That Colorado has Abused its Article II Authority to Appoint Presidential Electors in a “Manner” of that Colorado Law Doesn’t Authorize
7 Feb 2024, 2:35 pm by Marty Lederman
Senator); Anderson v. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Part Seven: Trump’s Two Remaining “Off-Ramp” Arguments: (i) That Colorado has Implemented a De Facto Extraconstitutional Presidential Qualification, in Violation of Term Limits v. Thornton; and (ii) That Colorado has Abused its Article II Authority to Appoint Presidential Electors in a “Manner” of Appointment that Colorado Law Doesn’t Authorize
7 Feb 2024, 2:02 pm by Marty Lederman
Senator); Anderson v. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/
[Josh Blackman] Tillman in the Times: "A Legal Outsider, an Offbeat Theory and the Fate of the 2024 Election"
7 Feb 2024, 7:42 am by Josh Blackman
Anderson. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
:@WilliamBaude: Section Three Is Not A "Political Question"
7 Feb 2024, 5:19 am by Will Baude
United States) or whether an issue lacks "judicially discoverable and manageable standards" to apply as law (such as political gerrymandering claims, as in Rucho v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
The U.S. is no Longer a "Mature Democracy": Implications for Trump's Ballot Eligibility
7 Feb 2024, 4:30 am by Michael C. Dorf
(2) Is the Presidency an "office ... under the United States? [read post]
Dorf on Law - http://www.dorfonlaw.org/
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Part Six: The Two “Off-Ramp” Arguments Based Upon In re Griffin’s Case that Would Allow the Supreme Court to Avoid Deciding Whether Trump is Eligible to be President
6 Feb 2024, 3:36 pm by Marty Lederman
  The state courts, for example, are not trying to enjoin Donald Trump from taking office. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/
Tune into one of the most important arguments in decades: Trump v. Anderson
6 Feb 2024, 7:35 am by Marcia Coyle
Link: Listen to Live Arguments at the Court The case, Trump v. [read post]
Constitution Daily - https://constitutioncenter.org/blog
:@WilliamBaude: The Use and Misuse of Section Three's "Legislative History": Part II
6 Feb 2024, 7:20 am by Will Baude
For example, Lash, in discussing the question of ratifiers' views on "whether Section Three applied to future insurrections," states (at 45) that "[v]ery few ratifiers specifically addressed" the question, but those who did "came to different conclusions" on this point. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
How To Listen To Donald Trump’s 14th Amendment Case at the Supreme Court
5 Feb 2024, 11:32 am by NCC Staff
The Supreme Court of the United States On its website, the Court provides live audio of the case arguments each term. [read post]
Constitution Daily - https://constitutioncenter.org/blog
Explaining Donald Trump’s 14th Amendment case at the Supreme Court
5 Feb 2024, 9:59 am by Scott Bomboy
Trump v. [read post]
Constitution Daily - https://constitutioncenter.org/blog
:@WilliamBaude: The Objection: "But He Hasn't Been Convicted Of Anything"
5 Feb 2024, 5:05 am by Will Baude
§2383, which covers participation in rebellion or insurrection, and which provides that those found guilty "shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
“In Trump v. Anderson, the Respondents’ Theory Would Render Unconstitutional Every Speaker and President Pro Tempore Since 1789, as Well as President Grant’s VP and Presidential Candidate George McGovern; Justice Scalia erred because there are no ‘Officers of the United States’ appointed outside Article II, Section II”
4 Feb 2024, 8:53 pm by Howard Bashman
“In Trump v. [read post]
How Appealing - http://howappealing.abovethelaw.com
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Part Five: Trump’s Argument That He Did Not Engage in an Insurrection
4 Feb 2024, 6:29 pm by Marty Lederman
” 395 U.S. at 447; see also Counterman v. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/
Untitled
4 Feb 2024, 5:57 pm by Bruce Ackerman
  Reed then explicitly rejects the Lederman view, in a discussion which concludes:   The United States is a constitutional democracy. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/
[Josh Blackman] In Trump v. Anderson, the Respondents' Theory Would Render Unconstitutional Every Speaker and President Pro Tempore Since 1789, as Well as President Grant's VP and Presidential Candidate George McGovern
4 Feb 2024, 1:01 pm by Josh Blackman
Fund v. [read post]
The Volokh Conspiracy - http://www.volokh.com/
A User’s Guide to Trump v. Anderson, Part Four: Trump’s Argument That His Tenure as President Did Not Subject Him to Section 3 Because the President is Not an “Officer of the United States”
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am by Marty Lederman
  The Positions Clause [1] employs the catch-all term “office, civil or military, under the United States,” whereas the Officials Clause [2] uses the catch-all term “officer of the United States. [read post]
Balkinization - http://balkin.blogspot.com/