In the Federalist Society, we debate ideas with the nuance we wish existed in other corners of the legal realm. It’s distressing to see some so eager to destroy that under the alleged auspices of impartiality.
Is there any reason that anonymous negative information from the American Bar Association should be discounted for Vanessa Bryant’s nomination but not for Lawrence VanDyke’s?
The fact the client owned a gun and had firearm permits was enough to label him as reasonably certain to cause death or serious bodily harm and report him to the police.
In an exchange on ‘Anderson Cooper 360,’ Michael Avenatti allowed Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz to goad him into admitting he broke rule 4.2 of the American Bar Association.
Each of these game-like features of law school conditions students to ‘play the game’ rather than act in the interest of others.
Robert Mueller’s investigation is showy and politically important, but it is not unique. It embodies our administrative state.
If there were ever an application to appear in court where one does not practice that warrants denial, Michael Avenatti’s is it.
As we enter the second year of Robert Mueller’s sprawling investigation, Hanlon’s Razor teaches us to ‘Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.’
The unsourced document details various ‘suspicious financial transactions’ allegedly made to Trump lawyer Michael Cohen through a limited liability company.
In his obsessive pursuit of President Trump, Robert Mueller has deprived Trump of his right to the counsel of his choice. Setting this precedent for Trump sets it for everyone.
I do hope alleged Donald Trump paramour Stormy Daniels is Michael Avenatti’s only client, because I find it difficult to believe he’s not neglecting his other cases and clients.
If Stormy Daniels’ lawyer Michael Avenatti truly feels he has a strong case, he would wait while it played out in court. Instead, he has bought a ticket to the circus.
The question Obergefell has raised across that land is: can we craft laws that permit mutually exclusive views to peacefully coexist? Or must the disfavored view be driven out of public life?
If the Wyoming Supreme Court is permitted to insert an unstated requirement upon judges, what prevents some future court from reading pastors, priests, and bishops into the same decision?
The case of Judge Ruth Neely in Wyoming shows, in stark clarity, that it doesn’t actually matter whether religious people do their jobs well and keep their religion to themselves.
Progressives have successfully transformed the First Amendment’s restrictions on government into an instrument of government speech control.
In 2005, a baby died of vicious head injuries. The man sent to death row for Baby Angel’s death was recently released after a team of hotshot lawyers took on his case for free.
- What My Dad Taught Me, His Daughter, About Manhood — And Why It MattersWe have a cultural imperative to teach boys how to be mcontinue reading >
- In Philadelphia Foster Care Case, Roberts Supreme Court Refuses To Protect Christians From PersecutionThe Philadelphia foster care case represented yet anothcontinue reading >
- Mickey Guyton Represents The Left’s Next Cultural Conquest: Country MusicMickey Guyton is every self-conscious, self-loathing Nacontinue reading >