Posts tagged with: "Barrett Brown" Results 1 - 20 of 567
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Apr 2024, 5:51 am by Albert W. Alschuler
When Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted that, under Trump’s proposed rule, even a president who staged a military coup couldn’t be prosecuted “if there was not a statute that expressly referenced the president,” Trump’s counsel, Sauer, agreed that this traitorous president could escape prosecution (it’s at p. 57 of the transcript). [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 11:39 am by Scott Bomboy
” Justice Amy Coney Barrett also asked Sauer if acts related to the Trump indictment were private acts taken by the former president. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 4:53 am by Beatrice Yahia
Jeremy Herb, Lauren dal Valle, Kara Scannell, Nicki Brown, and Brynn Gingras report for CNN. [read post]
From here, Justice Amy Coney Barrett confirmed that Sauer agreed private actions, separate from official acts, by a former president do not qualify for immunity. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 2:35 pm by Amy Howe
” Justice Amy Coney Barrett was less persuaded by this argument. [read post]
Justice Amy Coney Barrett also asked how the Idaho law would impact a woman in this scenario. [read post]
24 Apr 2024, 12:45 pm by Amy Howe
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson described what she saw as a direct conflict between EMTALA and Idaho’s abortion bam. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 3:14 pm by Whitney Hodges
The unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, found “[n]othing in constitutional text, history or precedent supports exempting legislatures from ordinary takings rules. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 2:49 pm by Amy Howe
” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson echoed Kagan’s skepticism, telling Evangelis that Robinson was not a helpful case for the city. [read post]
16 Apr 2024, 1:34 pm by Amy Howe
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson later echoed Barrett’s point, positing that Section 1512(c)(2) could be interpreted to “prohibit the corrupt tampering with things that are used to conduct an official proceeding with the intent of undermining the integrity of the thing and thereby obstructing the proceeding. [read post]
However, this 34-page decision included concurrences by Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 3:38 pm by Amy Howe
Five of the court’s conservative justices either wrote or joined opinions agreeing with the court’s disposition of the state’s request, while two members of the court’s liberal bloc – Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor – dissented from the ruling. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 1:10 pm by Ilya Somin
In a concurring opinion joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Justice Sotomayor emphasizes that the Court did not resolve the issue of whether the fee imposed on Sheetz would be a taking if imposed "outside the permitting process. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 10:56 am by Amy Howe
In an opinion joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, she argued that Nollan and Dolan only apply if the fee would have been a taking of property requiring government compensation if the government had imposed it outside the permitting process. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
Judge Cannon Shoots Down Trump’s Presidential Records Act Claim MSN – Devlin Barrett and Perry Stein (Washington Post) | Published: 4/4/2024 U.S. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 3:49 am by SHG
[David Lat] understands why the left remains traumatized by how Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was replaced by Justice Amy Coney Barrett. [read post]
4 Apr 2024, 6:32 am by Michael C. Dorf
Gore--but Roberts hardly gets a free pass there, given that he, along with Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, was part of the Bush legal team in the case. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
National/Federal Trump’s Legal Fees Are Sky High. [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 3:35 pm by Mark Walsh
” Meanwhile, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is willing to counter Alito’s aggressive line of questioning of Ellsworth, regarding whether the FDA had ever approved a drug and later had to pull it because of serious adverse consequences. [read post]