Nicholas Walter

Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz

51 West 52nd Street

New York, NY 10019

United States

SCHOLARLY PAPERS

3

DOWNLOADS

1,480

SSRN CITATIONS

5

CROSSREF CITATIONS

3

Scholarly Papers (3)

1.

Conservative Collision Course?: The Tension between Conservative Corporate Law Theory and Citizens United

Cornell Law Review, Vol. 100, P. 335, 2015, Harvard Law School John M. Olin Center Discussion Paper No. 788, U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 14-42
Number of pages: 57 Posted: 17 Aug 2014 Last Revised: 26 Feb 2015
Leo E. Strine Jr. and Nicholas Walter
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Downloads 849 (49,739)
Citation 4

Abstract:

Loading...

Corporate governance, political spending, Citizens United, conservative corporate theory, regulatory externalities, lobbying, profit maximization, constitutional law, election law, labor law

2.

Originalist or Original: The Difficulties of Reconciling Citizens United with Corporate Law History

The Harvard John M. Olin Discussion Paper No. 812
Number of pages: 94 Posted: 16 Feb 2015 Last Revised: 26 Feb 2015
Leo E. Strine Jr. and Nicholas Walter
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Downloads 420 (120,665)
Citation 2

Abstract:

Loading...

Citizens United, corporate law, originalism, legal history

3.

Originalist or Original: The Difficulties of Reconciling Citizens United with Corporate Law History

Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 91, Pg. 877, 2016, U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 15-3
Number of pages: 59 Posted: 21 Feb 2015 Last Revised: 30 Sep 2016
Leo E. Strine Jr. and Nicholas Walter
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Downloads 211 (246,693)
Citation 1

Abstract:

Loading...

Jurisprudence, constitutional interpretation, original intent, original understanding, originalism, election law, campaign finance reform, corporate personhood, general corporation statutes, political speech, First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad