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
Harvard professor Jonathan Zittrain and l were sitting down with Daniel Lewis and Nik Reed , the founders of a legal research startup named Ravel Law, along with lawyers from Harvard’s Office of General Counsel, Debevoise & Plimpton and Gundersen Dettmer. About the Author Adam Ziegler is a lawyer and software builder.
I built a document automation app online to help people fight their tickets for free using a recent courtdecision that had come down in Manhattan. There were two other courtdecisions from just outside of the city that were persuasive as well. Here’s the real punchline: I don’t practice traffic ticket law. Read it here.
A station runs a third-party ad, and the politician who is being attacked by the ad will contact the station – or have their lawyer contact the station – demanding that the station pull the ad for its alleged untruthfulness. This question arises all the time. But candidates for office are “public figures” under the NY Times v.
Lawyers objected but the judge let the testimony in. The system is at its most opaque when prosecutors know evidence is unfit for court but choose to game the rules, hoping judges and juries will believe it and vote to convict. People like Faria, defense lawyers and sometimes even the judges are blindsided. “I
But in one of those cases, the court’s denial of review prompted two justices to object. Federal prisoner Quartavious Davis asserted that his trial lawyer rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance for not pursuing a plea deal for him, causing him to receive a sentence many times longer than his co-defendants who pleaded guilty.
Indeed, last week my study on the decline of free speech was published with other example of this rising orthodoxy among faculty members (“ Harm and Hegemony: The Decline of Free Speech in the United States ”). It is not enough for Professor Feldman to passionately disagree with the constitutional interpretation of the Court or other faculty.
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