Search results for: "40" (2083 results)
to an appeal, particularly the losers, want to know the reason why.”). 15. JOHN RAWLS, POLITICAL LIBERALISM 231-40 (1993) (stating that judges give
RAWLS, POLITICAL LIBERALISM 231-40 (1993) (stating that judges give legal reasons be- cause they know that the public expects it); Mathilde Cohen
40 Stan. L. Rev. 1371, 1417 (1988); Daniel E. Ho & Erica L. Ross, Did Liberal Justices Invent the Standing Doctrine? An Empirical Study of the
Formalisms: How Law and Eco- nomics Mirrors Originalism and Textualism, 106 Cornell L. Rev. 591, 634-40 (2021) (de- scribing textualism in practice as
such as Susan Estrich 40 and Robin West 41 —agree that fraud cases 34. Joel Feinberg, Legal Paternalism, in PATERNALISM 3, 7 (Rolf Sartorius ed
legislative history.40 In an era of “unorthodox lawmaking,”41 in which statutes are often cobbled together from disparate legislative committees, 38
Remedies, 104 HARV. L. REV. 1731, 1739-40 (1991); Jeffries, supra note 1, at 98-99; and Daryl J. Levinson, Rights Essentialism and Remedial
Constitutional Restoration 214-21 (2014); Jeffrey Toobin, Partners, 87 New Yorker 40-51 (2011). Last Term, for instance, Justice Thomas secured the
its network components than the implicit price it charges its own members.40 Assume, for example, the price of a call from A1 to A2 is $2
States v. UAW-CIO, 352 U.S. 567, 572 (1957)(quoting 40 CONG. REC. 96 (1905)); see also McConnell, 540 U.S. at 115 (same). 9. Pub. L. No. 59-36, 34