Adam Shelton

@realACShelton

Husband to . Catholic. Attorney. Lifelong SF Giants Fan. LOTR enthusiast. Judicial Engagement Fellow . All views are solely my own.

Washington, DC
Vrijeme pridruživanja: siječanj 2017.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @realACShelton

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @realACShelton

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    8. sij

    Universal injunctions are controversial. But should they be? They actually make a lot of sense in our legal system and may even be required in certain categories of constitutional challenges. Check out my third post on the topic to learn more:

    Poništi
  2. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    Google: Are you having fun watching the game? America: Yeah actually, it's— Google: Did you want a reminder that everyone you love is going to die?

    Poništi
  3. 1. velj

    Courts have issued universal injunctions for the past century. But only recently have such injunctions become controversial. Just last week, some on both the left and the right called for to ban them. But universal injunctions are here to stay.

    Poništi
  4. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    1. velj

    Check this out from : Why National Injunctions Will Survive High Court Scrutiny.

    Poništi
  5. 1. velj

    Don’t forgot that your state has its own constitution with its own unique constitutional history. Follow to learn about yours!

    Poništi
  6. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    So welcomed Romney for years after he supported an individual mandate and signed into law a healthcare bill that was model for Romneycare. But wanting to hear from Bolton (a former board member of the org who was given an award for his conservatism) was a bridge to far.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  7. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    The House That Kobe Built

    Poništi
  8. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    31. sij
    Poništi
  9. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    30. sij

    Pretty universal bewilderment in and around the chamber as to what point Sen. Warren was trying to make by her question about the trial contributing to a "loss of legitimacy" for Roberts/SCOTUS. Schiff wanted nothing to do with it.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  10. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    Hamilton (Federalist 78): "No legislative act...contrary to the Constitution, can be valid...where the will of the legislature...stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former."

    Poništi
  11. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    30. sij

    I am skeptical of M4A for a host of reasons, but “a mother of two young kids shouldn’t complain about thousands of dollars of penalties for switching jobs” is how conservatives lose the health care debate.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. 30. sij

    The podcast, the articles by Bray and Sohoni, and the blog post are excellent resources to learn about the issue of universal injunctions (nationwide injunctions) outside of the political and controversial situations in which these injunctions sometimes arise

    Poništi
  13. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    29. sij

    Want to hear a podcast about *universal* injunctions? Here's one that I recorded with the Federalist Society yesterday:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. 29. sij

    I'm not sure that's the best argument to go with there...

    Poništi
  15. 29. sij

    CJE director discussed this issue on a recent podcast with former SG of Texas and current Baker Botts partner Scott Keller:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  16. 29. sij

    A solid thread on the issue. The discussion needs to move away from the nationwide terminology and move away from seeing the issue as one concerning the President and immigration. These universal injunctions help ensure that people without the means to sue receive protection.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  17. 29. sij

    A big part of the confusion in this debate is over terminology. Nationwide injunctions are a type of universal injunction. Universal injunctions have been issued by courts for well over a century and are used by courts to ensure that not everyone has to lawyer-up to be protected

    Poništi
  18. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    29. sij

    Universal injunctions & conservative justices? Well, it's complicated.

    Poništi
  19. 28. sij

    Check out this week's edition of to learn about the constitutional history of the . Both Presidents Reagan and Obama also had connections with the Illinois. check out the thread below to learn even more.

    Poništi
  20. 28. sij

    Meaning, the District Court entered an injunction that protected parties and nonparties alike in a nonclass action lawsuit. So Kavanaugh upheld essentially the same legal tool J. Gorsuch critiqued yesterday. It certainly sets up an interesting case in the near future.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  21. 28. sij

    While that decision does not specifically so say, it affirms the District Court. The District Court permanently enjoined the defendants, the IRS, from enforcing the challenged scheme, but it did not limit it only to the plaintiffs.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·