Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Amicus brief (3)
- First Amendment (3)
- Amendment (2)
- American Civil Liberties Union (2)
- Anti-Defamation League (2)
-
- Anti-discrimination legislation (2)
- Brian Moore (2)
- CADA (2)
- Cathy Hazouri (2)
- Church facilities (2)
- Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (2)
- Colorado Bar Association (2)
- Colorado Catholic Conference (2)
- Colorado Clergy for Equality in Marriage (2)
- Colorado Family Action (2)
- Commercial bakery (2)
- Compelled speech (2)
- Equal Rights of Colorado (2)
- Free exercise (2)
- Free speech (2)
- Freedom of speech (2)
- Gay (2)
- House Committee on Judiciary (2)
- Interfaith Alliance of Colorado (2)
- Jenny Kraska (2)
- Jim Pfaff (2)
- LGBT (2)
- LGBT access to justice (2)
- LGBT dignity (2)
- Legislative history (2)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Legal Writing and Research
Barnett Vs. Corson. Libel—Truth Of Statement As A Defence—Malice—Act Of Apr. 11, 1901, Construed
Barnett Vs. Corson. Libel—Truth Of Statement As A Defence—Malice—Act Of Apr. 11, 1901, Construed
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
No abstract provided.
Memorandum, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colo. Civil Rights Comm., __ U.S. __ (2017): Legislative History Of Sb08-200, Matt Simonsen
Memorandum, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colo. Civil Rights Comm., __ U.S. __ (2017): Legislative History Of Sb08-200, Matt Simonsen
Research Data
This legal Memorandum on the legislative history of a 2008 amendment to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) was researched and written by Matt Simonsen, J.D. Candidate 2019, University of Colorado Law School, and submitted to law professors Craig Konnoth and Melissa Hart. The Memorandum is cited in Brief of Amici Curiae Colorado Organizations and Individuals in Support of Respondents, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, __U.S.__ (2018) (No. 16-111).
4 p.
"The legislative history primarily identifies two issues that SB08-200 was designed to resolve: (1) the need for dignity and access to justice for LGBT people and …
Master File, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colo. Civil Rights Comm., __ U.S. __ (2017): Legislative History Of Sb08-200, Matt Simonsen
Master File, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colo. Civil Rights Comm., __ U.S. __ (2017): Legislative History Of Sb08-200, Matt Simonsen
Research Data
This Master File of the legislative history of a 2008 amendment to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) was researched and compiled by Matt Simonsen, J.D. Candidate 2019, University of Colorado Law School, and submitted to law professors Craig Konnoth and Melissa Hart. The SB08-200 Master File is cited in Brief of Amici Curiae Colorado Organizations and Individuals in Support of Respondents, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, __U.S.__ (2018) (No. 16-111).
449 p.
Debate, Richard Primus, Kevin M. Stack, Christopher Serkin, Nelson Tebbe
Debate, Richard Primus, Kevin M. Stack, Christopher Serkin, Nelson Tebbe
Cornell Law Review
No abstract provided.
Debating Is The Constitution Special?, Richard Primus, Kevin M. Stack, Christopher Serkin, Nelson Tebbe
Debating Is The Constitution Special?, Richard Primus, Kevin M. Stack, Christopher Serkin, Nelson Tebbe
Articles
In 1890, Louis Brandeis wrote The Right to Privacy. Within a matter of years, the courts began adopting his theory, creating a newly articulated legal right. This article likely represented the high-water mark of legal academia in terms of real world impact. In recent years, the academy has lost much of its relevance. Chief Justice Roberts ridiculed academic work, suggesting that legal scholarship has become esoteric and irrelevant. This should not be the case. The quality of legal scholars is higher than it has ever been—young scholars now often enter the academy with doctoral degrees in related fields. Likewise, technology …
Trending @ Rwu Law: Dean Yelnosky's Post: Spotlight On Faculty Teaching And Scholarship At Rwu Law, Michael Yelnosky
Trending @ Rwu Law: Dean Yelnosky's Post: Spotlight On Faculty Teaching And Scholarship At Rwu Law, Michael Yelnosky
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Pursuing Gault, David S. Tanenhaus, Eric C. Nystrom
Pursuing Gault, David S. Tanenhaus, Eric C. Nystrom
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Why I So Enjoyed Learning With And From Calvin Massey, Vikram David Amar
Why I So Enjoyed Learning With And From Calvin Massey, Vikram David Amar
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] “I am pleased and proud to participate in this tribute to Calvin Massey, with whom I had the pleasure to work and play for about two decades. When I think of Calvin—and I think of him often—I think of a generous friend, a gregarious colleague and a genuinely good man. He possessed many admirable traits, but today I want to focus on three: (1) his breadth; (2) his independent mind; and (3) his thoughtfulness.”
A Missed Opportunity To Clarify Students' First Amendment Rights In The Digital Age, Elizabeth Shaver
A Missed Opportunity To Clarify Students' First Amendment Rights In The Digital Age, Elizabeth Shaver
Akron Law Faculty Publications
In the last decade, the federal circuit courts have grappled with the issue whether, and to what extent, school officials constitutionally may discipline students for their off-campus electronic speech. Before 2015, three federal circuit courts had extended school authority to off-campus electronic speech by applying a vague test that allows school officials to reach far beyond the iconic “schoolhouse gate” referenced in the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) Two other federal circuits had avoided the issue altogether by deciding the cases before them on other grounds. In 2015, …
Telling Stories In The Supreme Court: Voices Briefs And The Role Of Democracy In Constitutional Deliberation, Linda H. Edwards
Telling Stories In The Supreme Court: Voices Briefs And The Role Of Democracy In Constitutional Deliberation, Linda H. Edwards
Scholarly Works
On January 4, 2016, over 112 women lawyers, law professors, and former judges told the world that they had had an abortion. In a daring amicus brief that captured national media attention, the women “came out” to their clients; to the lawyers with or against whom they practice; to the judges before whom they appear; and to the Justices of the Supreme Court.
The past three years have seen an explosion of such “voices briefs,” 16 in Obergefell and 17 in Whole Woman’s Health. The briefs can be powerful, but their use is controversial. They tell the stories of non-parties—strangers …