Another Big Law and Religion Case on the Horizon?
Religious property disputes may be headed back to the Supreme Court
Religious property disputes may be headed back to the Supreme Court
Judge Amy Coney Barrett participated in a moot court of Texas v. California, and it did not go well for the challengers.
At least three judges nominated by President Nixon were appointed by President Ford. Ditto for nominees by President Kennedy.
But the City did not impose restrictions on similarly situated, non-Jewish neighborhoods in the Bronx, Manhattan, and Staten Island
Threatening to burn a person with a lighter is peaceful free speech, but the name John Marshall is violent speech.
Cancelling John Marshall makes it big.
The law professors are Jane Bambauer (Arizona), Mark Lemley (Stanford), and me, and moderator Ted Parson (UCLA).
The Chief Justice surgically sliced up the Court's removal power cases into four categories.
Seila Law and Assignability of Easements
The second rule of Court Packing is you do not talk about Court Packing.
"The organizations collaborated with the Republican attorneys general who filed suit and conscripted law professor Randy Barnett to draft an influential report on the constitutionality of the ACA."
"In order to invoke this Court’s diversity jurisdiction, Plaintiff must allege that the citizenship of each member of the LLC defendant was diverse from that of Plaintiff at the date of this action’s filing."
A 2016 op-ed by Benjamin Wittes and Miguel Estrada is worth revisiting.
Noah Feldman explains why liberals should want someone like Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court
"In NFIB v. Sebelius, the inspiration for Barnett’s book, Chief Justice Roberts pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute."
Excessive traffic and pedestrian stops, especially in black communities, are dangerous and counterproductive.
If reports are accurate, Justice Amy Coney Barrett may be the final 9th Justice
Still more on this interesting decision (and one that takes a much less government-friendly approach than many other recent decisions on these general topics).
More on this interesting decision (and one that takes a much less government-friendly approach than many other recent decisions on these general topics).
The distinction between "political messages" and other messages isn't "capable of reasoned application," holds the Third Circuit.
This year's annual confab is remote, but will still feature the annual B. Kenneth Simon Lecture and release of the Cato Supreme Court Review.
Houston prohibits zoning. But Houston permits a "Historic Preservation Ordinance."
This case may be headed to the Supreme Court.
Chief Judge Pryor "write[s] separately to explain a difficult truth about the nature of the judicial role."
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10