Remove Administrative Law Remove Constitutional Law Remove Legal Remove Litigating
article thumbnail

Justice Mahmud Jamal becomes first person of color to sit on Canada Supreme Court

JURIST

In a press release , Trudeau stated the he “know[s] Jamal, with his exceptional legal and academic experience and dedication to serving others, will be a valuable asset to our country’s highest court.” It speaks to his long career as a litigator before his appointment to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2019.

Court 239
article thumbnail

India Supreme Court issues notice in petition challenging bar exam rules

JURIST

It is typically conducted by the Bar Council twice a year to test the candidates’ knowledge on various substantive and procedural la w such as constitutional law, administrative law, the Indian Penal Code, criminal and civil procedure, evidence, public interest litigation, and professional ethics.

Bar Exam 118
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Becerra’s Blunder: Did the Administration Allow Fauci and other Officials to Operate Illegally?

JonathanTurley

” It turns out she might have been more accurate than she thought — because Fauci legally may have been just a “regular guy” giving out billions without authority. What is equally baffling is that the House informed the administration that it was presumptively in violation of federal law.

Legal 35
article thumbnail

Tick, Tick, Tick…: The Supreme Court Readies an Explosive Docket for 2022

JonathanTurley

After Dobbs was accepted, advocates sought to enjoin a Texas law that banned abortion after just six weeks. The court ruled 5-4 to allow the Texas law to be enforced. The Biden administration and other litigants then forced a reconsideration of that decision. Chevron USA Inc. Natural Resources Defense Council Inc.

Court 46
article thumbnail

An alarmist take on the Supreme Court’s agenda

SCOTUSBlog

The book is unlikely to change many minds, however, because it betrays the very fault of which it accuses the court: It advances a vision of correct decision-making rooted more in partisan policy preferences than in neutral legal criteria. Even so, I am skeptical that the court will alter the law as dramatically as Millhiser fears.