Thursday, December 11, 2008

Qualified Immunity with a Coke and a smile?

Slate's Dahlia Lithwick has a recap of a fascinating oral argument at the Court yesterday.  Although it is primarily about procedural rules, the Con Law implication is about how those rules are being applied against one Mr. John Ashcroft.  Read the recap to hear the Justices' thoughts on Coca Cola, among other things.

NLS

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2008/12/qualified-immun.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0105365bc853970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Qualified Immunity with a Coke and a smile?:

Comments

Post a comment