––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://test.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
- Posted November 02, 2012
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Law professor to provide historical perspective of Supreme Court, Nov. 19

On Monday, Nov. 19, at 7:30 p.m., Richard D. Friedman, Alene and Allan F. Smith Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School, will speak on the topic "The Supreme Court: An Historical Perspective" at the Birmingham Temple, 28611 West Twelve Mile Road in Farmington Hills.
Friedman specializes in the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause and constitutional history. He will provide an overview of the Marshall era, Dred Scott, the Lochner era, the New Deal, Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v Wade, Bush v. Gore, the recent health care case, and a glance ahead to same sex marriage issues likely to arise.
The event is open to the public. Admission is free. For additional information, call 248-477-1411 or e-mail infor@birminghhamtemple.com.
Published: Fri, Nov 2, 2012
headlines Oakland County
- Whitmer signs gun violence prevention legislation
- Department of Attorney General conducts statewide warrant sweep, arrests 9
- Adoptive families across Michigan recognized during Adoption Day and Month
- Reproductive Health Act signed into law
- Case study: Documentary highlights history of courts in the Eastern District
headlines National
- This LA lawyer levels up legal protections in the video game industry
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Legal champions to receive Spirit of Excellence Award at 2026 ABA Midyear Meeting
- Fake Sullivan & Cromwell entities used by scammers should be dissolved, suit says
- Hackers gained access to ‘small number’ of attorney emails at Williams & Connolly, firm confirms
- Before joining Anderson Kill, judge was accused of rude behavior on bench, retaliatory threats in ethics case