Epstein Secrets

dale Cleary Gottlieb Cohen Milstein EFTA00032562 --- PAGE BREAK --- BANKING & SECURITIES Supreme Court Agrees To Review SEC's In-House Judges The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to consider whether the hiring of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission administrative law judges violates the appointments clause

ters to oil and gas drilling next year. Read more » Fracking Case Now Moot, Ute Indian Tribe Tells 10th Circ. The Ute Indian Tribe on Thursday told the Tenth Circuit that an appeal of a lower court order striking down the U.S. Bureau of Land Management's strengthening of regulations for fracking on federal and N

in one of the Oklahoma City bombing prosecutions, the Tenth Circuit rebuked a trial judge for permitting an attorney

in opposition to a plea. The prosecutor refused to convey that information to the court and the trial judge accepted the plea. When the issue reached the Utah Supreme Court, the court concluded that the prosecutor had an ethical obligation as an officer of the court to convey that information to the judge: Prosecutors m

n handedly to both prosecution and the defense. Neither side is required to disclose the address or telephone number of a victim, thus complying with the Supreme Court's instruction that "in the absence of a strong showing of state interests to the contrary, discovery must be a two- 204 See infra notes 528-539 and ac

BREAK --- Page 7 of 52 2005 B.Y.U.L. Rev. 835, *846 The victims subsequently filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit seeking review of the district court's ruling. *4 Three months later, a Tenth Circuit panel rejected the victims' claims. >> The circuit found "a num

--- Page 21 of 52 2005 B.Y.U.L. Rev. 835, *870 court, and the trial judge accepted the plea. The victim then obtained legal counsel and appealed to the Utah Supreme Court, urging that under the Utah Victims’ Rights Amendment, her right to be heard regarding a plea had been violated. The State responded that the victim

also resided in that state would be incidental. An understanding of the Article II] provision as protecting the community's interest is bolstered by the Supreme Court's decisions on right of public access to trials. In cases such as Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 7°4 the Court has held that a guarantee of the