Antonin Scalia
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the author
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Bryan A. Garner
|
Co authors |
2
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, creating a vacancy on the court. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Debate between Author and Scalia | Harvard Law School | View |
| 2009-01-01 | N/A | Author issued a challenge to Justice Scalia to debate. | N/A | View |
| 1986-11-03 | N/A | Scheduled hearing of the Tison brothers' case before the Supreme Court. | Supreme Court (implied) | View |
20250728111721067_24-1073ReplyInSupportOfPetitionForWritO...
This document is a legal reply brief filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell (Petitioner) against the United States, dated July 28, 2025. The brief argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed by Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of Florida, which promised not to prosecute 'potential co-conspirators' in 'the United States,' should legally bind other districts like the Southern District of New York. The filing highlights a circuit split on whether US Attorneys can bind other districts and contends that the Second Circuit's decision allowing Maxwell's prosecution violates contract law and the plain text of the agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00000244.tif
This document is a table of authorities, listing various legal cases and other authoritative texts. It includes case citations with court, year, and page references, along with one entry for a legal treatise co-authored by Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner.
DOJ-OGR-00000223.tif
This document appears to be a section from a table of contents or bibliography, listing two legal texts. It references the U.S. Department of Justice's 'Justice Manual' from February 2018 and 'Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts' from 2012, co-authored by Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner.
DOJ-OGR-00000057.tif
This document is a legal analysis discussing principles of statutory interpretation, particularly concerning the meaning of 'United States' in plea agreements. It details how language placement in a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) informs intent, specifically noting how a co-conspirator immunity clause was severed from Epstein's immunity clause and how the NPA's terms may preclude Maxwell's prosecution.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031972.jpg
A newspaper clipping containing two main articles. The first details the Trump administration's lawsuit against California regarding sanctuary laws, highlighting the conflict between Attorney General Jeff Sessions and California officials like Jerry Brown and Xavier Becerra. The second article reports on the suspension of prominent physicist Lawrence M. Krauss by Arizona State University following sexual misconduct allegations published by BuzzFeed. Krauss, who directed the Origins Project (an initiative known to have been funded by Jeffrey Epstein, though Epstein is not explicitly named in this specific text), issued a rebuttal denying the claims.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016515.jpg
This document is a page from a legal academic article (Minnesota Law Review) discussing the concept of 'underenforcement' in the criminal justice system, particularly regarding sexual assaults and corruption. It argues that underenforcement often stems from bias or favoritism and undermines the legitimacy of legal institutions. The document bears the name of David Schoen (one of Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys) and a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp, suggesting it was submitted as part of the congressional investigation into the handling of the Epstein case, likely to argue points regarding prosecutorial discretion or failure to prosecute.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017315.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a book manuscript or legal commentary (dated April 2, 2012), likely written by Alan Dershowitz given the context of Harvard Law and debating Scalia. It critiques the US legal system's handling of 'actual innocence' claims, specifically highlighting the Jeffrey MacDonald case and the Supreme Court's stance. The text includes a 2009 challenge from the author to Justice Antonin Scalia regarding the compatibility of his constitutional views on execution with Catholic doctrine.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017260.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a manuscript or memoir (possibly by Alan Dershowitz given the self-reference) included in House Oversight evidence. It recounts a specific legal argument before the Supreme Court involving Justice Scalia regarding the 'Enmund' case (Enmund v. Florida) and the application of the felony murder rule when guns are provided during a crime. The text is a dialogue transcript interspersed with narrative commentary.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017258.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a legal memoir or manuscript (likely by Alan Dershowitz, who argued *Tison v. Arizona*) submitted to the House Oversight Committee. It details the narrator's oral arguments before the Supreme Court on November 3, 1986, defending the Tison brothers against the death penalty by arguing they lacked specific intent to kill. The text recounts interactions with Justice White and mentions a challenge from Justice Scalia.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017256.jpg
This excerpt details the legal aftermath of the Tison gang crimes, focusing on the defense attorney's efforts to save the surviving brothers from the death penalty by appealing to the Supreme Court. It discusses the application of felony murder laws and analyzes the relevance of the precedent set by *Enmund v. Florida* (1982) regarding culpability and capital punishment. The text also highlights the challenges posed by the changing composition of the Supreme Court, specifically the appointments of conservative justices like Antonin Scalia and William Rehnquist.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017127.jpg
The author reflects on their time at Brooklyn College, detailing academic successes, conflicts with college President Harry Gideonese regarding political purges, and a rejected Rhodes Scholarship application attributed to bias. The narrative concludes with the author's decision to pursue law school, inspired by famous legal figures, and their attempt to seek advice from a family connection, Judge Berenkoff.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017098.jpg
This document appears to be page 11 of a manuscript or autobiographical statement by Alan Dershowitz (inferred by context), dated April 2, 2012, and bearing a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp. The text lists numerous high-profile individuals the author has advised, including Presidents and celebrities, as well as prominent figures he has debated. It details his involvement in legal cases, his media advocacy for Israel, and mentions that in 2010 he declined an offer from the Israeli Prime Minister to serve as Israel's Ambassador to the UN.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015457.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a manuscript or article titled 'Alternative Facts' found within House Oversight discovery materials. The text is a highly critical political commentary contrasting the 2000 election of George Bush with the 2016 election of Donald Trump, focusing heavily on the electoral college and Hillary Clinton's involvement in both eras. The author, a former columnist for the New York Press, recounts sending a letter to Clinton regarding her unkept promise to abolish the electoral college.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014050.jpg
This document is page 71 of a 2014 legal analysis (likely a law review article) discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It uses the Epstein case as a primary example of why victims need rights before formal charges are filed, specifically citing how Jane Doe Number One and Two were not informed that prosecutors had secretly bargained away sex offense charges. The text argues that the CVRA's plain language supports extending rights to victims throughout the criminal justice process, even before charges are filed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022380.jpg
This document outlines the proposed administrative agenda for the incoming Trump administration, focusing on its top priorities for the first 100 days. Key initiatives include infrastructure investment, tax reform, repealing the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and immigration reform, alongside a list of specific acts to be enacted. The brief also discusses the procedural challenges of repealing existing regulations, plans to fill the Supreme Court vacancy, and intended actions on trade agreements like NAFTA and the TPP.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022372.jpg
This document is a post-election analysis from Washington Council Ernst & Young dated November 9, 2016. It details Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton in the presidential election, the Republicans retaining control of Congress, and outlines potential policy agendas and political challenges, such as filling the Supreme Court vacancy. The document contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity