This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The Supreme Court, by a vote of 6-3, reversed the lower court. She thinks the lower court misapplied Reed v. Goertz , but wrote that the Court's analysis "muddies the waters of standing doctrine." But, in the Lochner era, the Court began to hold that "liberty" includes fundamental rights generally. See Lochner v.
It was a bathroom break that inspired Bradley Neal , a 3L at The George Washington University LawSchool , to develop a product that uses generative AI to help law students better understand and brief cases. Returning to class after a visit to the bathroom, he had lost the thread of the case the professor was discussing.
With this being the case, we focus on a variety of paralegal, legal assistant, and administrative assistant legal positions in our home country. in Alberta, for example, a paralegal is not allowed to represent another person in court, but they can in Ontario or British Columbia. Here’s the interesting part.
The Spring/Summer 2021 Review of the California Supreme Court Historical Society has reached mailboxes and is available online. [I’m Here are the contents: What Did We Learn from the California Courts’ Response to the Influenza Epidemic of 1918-1919? I’m on the Society’s board.]. by Jennifer King.
Lincoln Caplan is a senior research scholar and a visiting lecturer in law at Yale LawSchool and also teaches in Yale’s English and political science departments. By 5-4, in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. Seattle School District No. They are his most powerful.
Saul Cornell is the Paul and Diane Guenther chair in American history at Fordham University and adjunct professor of law at Fordham LawSchool. It is particularly noteworthy that Justice Stephen Breyer called out his colleagues for engaging in the most rank form of law-office history in his dissent.
Written by Hadrien Pauchard (assistant researcher at Sciences Po LawSchool) The fourth issue of the Revue critique de droit International privé of 2023 (available here ) was released online some time ago. It features two articles and several case notes. Written by Pr.
One issue to watch is how Judge Bruce Schroeder handles the gun count, which is based on what I believe is a flawed legal interpretation by the prosecution. Here is the column: The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse increasingly seems like a legal version of the parable of the blind men and the elephant. Biased media viewers.
Below is my column on the growing attacks on the legitimacy of the Supreme Court after the decision to overturn Roe v. As the Court ends its term, Democratic leaders are calling for removing justices, packing the Court, and other extreme reactions to the decision in Dobbs v. issued a warning to the Supreme Court: Reaffirm Roe v.
Here are the facts from the opinion: On April 1, 2022, the lawschool at the University of Idaho held a “moment of community” in response to an anti-LGBTQ+ slur that had been left anonymously on a whiteboard in one of its classrooms in Boise, Idaho. Plaintiff Seamon is a professor at the lawschool and the CLS faculty advisor.
We recently discussed the controversy at Rutgers LawSchool over the reading of the “n-word” from a state supreme court opinion. The requirement (for any group receiving more than $250) presents some interesting questions in the conflict between free speech and diversity programs at such schools.
Lawschools are also facing controversial mandates. In 2022, the American Bar Association required lawschools to “provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism: (1) at the start of the program of legal education, and (2) at least once again before graduation.”
These false narratives have been eagerly repeated in the media despite lacking legal or factual support. This false narrative is being repeated despite the fact courts have rejected this claim in actual criminal cases. Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University LawSchool.
.” The problem, however, is that this is just like the transport of migrants to Martha’s Vineyard in September 2022, which a number of Democratic leaders and legal experts insisted was also a clear case of kidnapping and human trafficking. The reason is that these claims are made for cable news, not courts of law.
It shows the same combination of student cancelling campaigns and the enabling actions of school administrators. He writes in the areas of Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, Intellectual Property, Contracts, Bankruptcy, Law and Economics, Business and Corporate Law at USD. If necessary, he can sue and prevail in court.
I recently discussed the Supreme Court’s affirmance of a decision rejecting constitutional arguments that the District of Columbia is entitled to a vote in Congress. I have repeatedly testified and written on the constitutional barriers to such a vote absent statehood. I was delighted when he accepted.
Share The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on various ideas for Supreme Court reform. Like the last meeting , various legal experts testified and answered questions from commissioners in a series of panels spread throughout the day.
Supreme Court. Jackson will replace Justice Stephen Breyer who is set to retire when the Court’s term ends this summer. While Jackson’s confirmation will not shift the balance of the Court, it will make the Court more diverse and more reflective of the country. Jackson is also the Court’s sixth female justice.
During his time as an associate justice from 1877 to 1911, he broke with his colleagues in some of the most consequential – and infamous – rulings that the court has ever issued. He is also a graduate of Columbia LawSchool. Harlan’s moral vision is memorialized in his lone dissent in Plessy v. The back story.
I began my association with the House as a teenaged leadership page in the 1970s and continued through to my legal representation of the House in federal court. I have testified more than 100 times over the last four decades on a wide array of constitutional and statutory issues.
Vigilante Justice Firearm Laws. The law professors detail that the small arms race arises from three main “troubling” legal implications, and it’s looking at the examples of Wisconsin and Georgia’s laws that “exemplify this perilous confluence.”. Legal Solutions. The forthcoming paper can be accessed here.
It was always doubtful that a lawschool would take the unprecedented step of barring a sitting Supreme Court justice. The problem is that most targets of these campaigns have neither the status nor the day job of a Supreme Court justice. The reason? His vote to overturn Roe v.
As discussed below, there could be legal as well as political ramifications as the House moves forward with the long-delayed investigation of these social media companies. It is still early to determine possible legal implications of these files, but there are some areas likely to be of immediate concern for counsel.
This switchboarding process was confirmed by Brian Scully of the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), during prior court testimony. Ohio , 378 U.S. 184 (1964): “I shall not today attempt further to define [it] … But I know it when I see it.”
This movement is expanding and accelerating in its effort to curtail the right that Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once called “indispensable” to our constitutional system. Starting in secondary schools, we have raised a generation of speech phobics who believe that opposing views are triggering and dangerous.
The controversial law came up in oral arguments over the access to the abortion pill in the Supreme Court. The history of the Act, and its namesake, remains a blot on our legal system. For some of us, this is a painful reminder that the law continues to linger on our books. The repeal of the Comstock Act is long overdue.
Charles Barzun is a Professor of Law at the University of Virginia, where he teaches ConstitutionalLaw, Evidence, Jurisprudence, and Torts.He is currently working on a book on the American common law tradition. Consider a few examples: In his 1997 opinion for the court in Old Chief v.
As Democrats ramp up their efforts for the 2024 election, some are dangling an old enticement from 2020: if we win, we can pack the Court. In the last election, President Joe Biden refused to say if he favored packing the Court. who has questioned the need for a Supreme Court. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)
Tom would make it with his mother to the United States and ultimately studied law, with a J.D. at New York University LawSchool and his LL.M. degrees in international law from Harvard LawSchool. The recusal was a riveting moment for the court, and his colleagues quickly dispensed with the frivolous claim.
As I discussed yesterday , I was astonished by the remarks of President Joe Biden on his support for extending the eviction moratorium, which was found to be unconstitutional by lower courts. It was later preserved by a divided Supreme Court despite the view of a majority that it was unconstitutional.
Since the time of court jesters, comedians have challenged rulers and entrenched political classes. Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutionallaw scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University LawSchool.
Walz proceeded to quote the line from a 1919 case in which Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said you do not have the right to falsely yell fire in a crowded theater. interjected with the fire-in-a-theater question to say such censorship is needed and constitutional. It also is fundamentally wrong. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y.,
Share President Joe Biden will issue an executive order to create a commission to study potential reforms to the Supreme Court, the White House announced on Friday. In its statement, the White House indicated that the commission will be a bipartisan one, made up of experts “on the Court and the Court reform debate.”
When I was clerking in Louisiana after graduating lawschool, there was story of a rather notorious local judge asking counsel in a criminal case if he was ready to present the case of the defendant. Jennifer Granholm (D-Mich) in 2007 after a long legal career as private counsel.
The debacle in the Hunter Biden investigation has left most objective legal analysts in disbelief, with one CNN analyst calling it an “ unholy mess.” Weiss cut a deal with Hunter’s legal team that was widely derided. For House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), What followed has bordered on the burlesque.
” It turns out she might have been more accurate than she thought — because Fauci legally may have been just a “regular guy” giving out billions without authority. What is equally baffling is that the House informed the administration that it was presumptively in violation of federal law. It stressed in Cody v.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem appeared before the Senate Homeland Security committee amidst a looming constitutional crisis. ” Because Maggie Hassan has a law degree, unlike Noem or Miller. Perhaps it’s a problem that the most immediately pressing question of constitutionallaw is being managed by a pair of non-lawyers.
Then it becomes a game (and not a happy one) to get paid, incurring additional expenses along the way, expenses that the client never anticipated and for which the client is really peeved at having to pay to get what the court already said was his. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. How did this happen?
For three days, Americans watched the Senate Judiciary Committee hold what were called confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. The question of being “hard” or “soft” on crime should not be an issue that defines the qualifications of a Supreme Court Justice. The hearings barely lived up to the name.
I am pleased to announce that leading legal scholars and Supreme Court litigators Neal Katyal and Michael McConnell have joined the litigation team for VOS Selections, Inc. He is a leading left-of-center constitutionallaw scholar, and has argued over fifty cases before the US Supreme Court. After the U.S.
Share At the end of each year, SCOTUSblog remembers some of the people whose lives and work left an imprint on the Supreme Court. From legendary lawyers to lesser-known activists, journalists, and plaintiffs, the following individuals who died in 2022 all shaped the court and the law in their own ways. David Beckwith (Oct.
Mark practices in State and Federal Court representing injury victims throughout Wisconsin. He has found considerable success as a rising star in the Arizona legal industry and had the opportunity to argue before the Supreme Court on three different occasions. You can learn more on The Entrekin Law Firm’s personal injury page.
As previously discussed, there has been a campaign from the left to pressure firms to force out Republican lawyers or to drop conservative clients (with the support of lawyers and legal commentators). The Supreme Court has decided since Heller that the Second Amendment bestows an individual right.
The bills are the latest examples of “gotcha legislation,” though the Florida bill could raise some interesting legal questions if Gov. Both proposals face serious legal challenges and likely could not survive as codified soundbites. Newsom’s gun ‘heartbeat’ law. Here is the column: California Gov.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content