Title : Amy Coney Barrett "may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions" — according to Linda Greenhouse...
link : Amy Coney Barrett "may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions" — according to Linda Greenhouse...
Amy Coney Barrett "may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions" — according to Linda Greenhouse...
... writing in "Testing Time at the Supreme Court/The outcome of a property rights case could foretell how much conservatives can expect from the justices" (NYT).
The California law, enacted in 1975 as the product of Cesar Chavez’s drive to organize the state’s farmworkers, authorizes the union to approach workers in the field before and after the working day for up to three hours on 120 days of a year.
“So let me ask you this,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said to [the lawyer arguing for that any authorization of entry onto private is a taking]. “What if California had a regulation that permitted union organizers to go onto the property of your clients one hour a day, one day a year. Is that a taking subject to the per se rule?”
Yes, the lawyer replied. His answer was certainly no surprise to the justices listening remotely to the argument. His theory of the case required precisely that answer, as Justice Barrett — who may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions — surely knew.
Nonetheless, it underscored just how audacious the Pacific Legal Foundation’s position is....
... writing in "Testing Time at the Supreme Court/The outcome of a property rights case could foretell how much conservatives can expect from the justices" (NYT).
The California law, enacted in 1975 as the product of Cesar Chavez’s drive to organize the state’s farmworkers, authorizes the union to approach workers in the field before and after the working day for up to three hours on 120 days of a year.
“So let me ask you this,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said to [the lawyer arguing for that any authorization of entry onto private is a taking]. “What if California had a regulation that permitted union organizers to go onto the property of your clients one hour a day, one day a year. Is that a taking subject to the per se rule?”
Yes, the lawyer replied. His answer was certainly no surprise to the justices listening remotely to the argument. His theory of the case required precisely that answer, as Justice Barrett — who may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions — surely knew.
Nonetheless, it underscored just how audacious the Pacific Legal Foundation’s position is....
Thus articles Amy Coney Barrett "may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions" — according to Linda Greenhouse...
You now read the article Amy Coney Barrett "may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions" — according to Linda Greenhouse... with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2021/03/amy-coney-barrett-may-be-giving-justice.html
0 Response to "Amy Coney Barrett "may be giving Justice Elena Kagan a run for her money in the department of well-designed hypothetical questions" — according to Linda Greenhouse..."
Post a Comment