YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsTheodore B Olson

Theodore B Olson

March 6, 2003 | David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer
A Bush administration official urged the Supreme Court on Wednesday to revive a law that would require the nation's public libraries to install software filters on their computers to screen out pornography. Last year, a special federal court in Philadelphia ruled that the law violated principles of free speech and blocked it from taking effect. In Wednesday's argument before the Supreme Court, U.S. Solicitor General Theodore B.
May 28, 2003 | David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer
In a victory for the Bush administration, the Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a challenge to the use of secret deportation hearings authorized after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Without comment, the justices turned away an appeal brought by news organizations in New Jersey. So far, the high court has shown no interest in taking up legal claims that have arisen recently in the war on terrorism.
November 14, 2003 | From Reuters
A federal judge Thursday rejected a request by Jonathan Pollard, a civilian U.S. naval intelligence officer who admitted spying for Israel, to reopen his case and reconsider his 1987 sentence of life in prison. U.S. District Chief Judge Thomas Hogan said a different judge had been correct in 2001 in turning down Pollard's request for resentencing. Pollard, 49, is serving the life sentence at a federal prison in North Carolina.
November 14, 2006 | From the Associated Press
The Supreme Court on Monday let stand the murder conviction of Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, who is serving a prison term of at least 20 years. The justices declined, without comment, to take Skakel's appeal of his conviction in the beating death of his Greenwich, Conn., neighbor, Martha Moxley, 31 years ago when the two were teenagers. Skakel, a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, was convicted in 2002. Skakel, 46, is serving 20 years to life in prison. His lawyer, former Solicitor General Theodore B.
March 25, 2009
When is a movie not just a movie? According to the Federal Election Commission, when the film's villain isn't a terrorist or a drug dealer but a candidate for president. The agency decided that the producers of a 90-minute documentary critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton -- which they hoped to offer "on demand" to interested cable TV viewers -- had to abide by rules governing "electioneering communications," including a prohibition on advertising close to a primary or general election.
April 28, 2004 | From Associated Press
Excerpts from Tuesday's Supreme Court oral arguments, as transcribed by Alderson Reporting Co.: Solicitor Gen. Theodore B. Olson: This is a case about the separation of powers. The Constitution explicitly commits to the president's discretion the authority to obtain the opinions of subordinates and to formulate recommendations for legislation. Congress may neither intrude on the president's ability to perform these functions nor authorize private litigants to use the courts to do so....
February 14, 1999
Re "Leading the President Astray," Commentary, Jan. 25: The rantings of Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz against Robert Bennett, President Clinton's lawyer in the Paula Jones case, would be laughable if they were not so irresponsible. Dershowitz does not know what advice Bennett gave to his client, the extent to which the president may have lied to his lawyer (beyond the lying to Bennett that the president has already acknowledged), or what tactical decisions in the Jones case were made, not by Bennett, but by the president or others on the ample White House legal team.
January 26, 2011 | By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times
An attorney for same-sex couples hoping to overturn Proposition 8 in federal court urged the California Supreme Court on Tuesday to reject a request that it rule on whether initiative sponsors have authority to defend ballot measures. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals asked the state high court earlier this month whether California law gives initiative proponents the right to defend a ballot measure when state officials refuse to do so. In federal court, the general rule is that only a party that is directly affected by a trial court ruling has standing or authority to appeal it. State officials have refused to appeal the August ruling against Proposition 8. In his letter to the state court, Theodore B. Olson, an attorney for two same-sex couples, said that the question of standing in federal court is a federal constitutional issue, not a state one, and that the California Supreme Court would merely prolong the case by agreeing to answer the 9th Circuit's question.
The tiny fairy shrimp, which lives in rainwater ponds in California's Central Valley, won a victory of sorts Monday at the Supreme Court, as the justices turned away a challenge to its federal protection as an endangered species. It marked the third time in recent years that the high court has refused to limit the federal government's power to protect wildlife. Property rights advocates have been eager for the court's conservative justices to reconsider the reach of the Endangered Species Act.
Los Angeles Times Articles