Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Completing Caperton And Clarifying Common Sense Through Using The Right Standard For Constitutional Judicial Recusal, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Completing Caperton And Clarifying Common Sense Through Using The Right Standard For Constitutional Judicial Recusal, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
In Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a state supreme court decision in which a justice who had received $3 million in campaign support from a litigant cast the deciding vote to relieve the litigant of a $50 million liability. The Court reached this result, one I view as compelled by common sense, through a 5-4 vote, with the dissenters, led by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia, minimizing the danger of biased judging presented by the situation and questioning the practical feasibility of the Court's approach as well as the wisdom of …
Judicial Misconduct In Criminal Cases: It’S Not Just The Counsel Who May Be Ineffective And Unprofessional, Richard Klein
Judicial Misconduct In Criminal Cases: It’S Not Just The Counsel Who May Be Ineffective And Unprofessional, Richard Klein
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Does A Diverse Judiciary Attain A Rule Of Law That Is Inclusive? What Grutter V. Bollinger Has To Say About Diversity On The Bench, Sylvia R. Lazos
Does A Diverse Judiciary Attain A Rule Of Law That Is Inclusive? What Grutter V. Bollinger Has To Say About Diversity On The Bench, Sylvia R. Lazos
Scholarly Works
Race matters, but judges and courts have failed to fashion a rule of law that is inclusive of all racial perspectives and realities in the United States. The reason for this dismal performance lies in how predominantly White judges, and therefore courts, conceptualize race. This article illustrates this proposition by analyzing the Rehnquist Court's race relations jurisprudence in three Supreme Court decisions handed down in 2003: Grutter v. Bollinger,Gratz v. Bollinger,and Georgia v. Ashcroft.Even as the United States Supreme Court entered increasingly complex areas of race relations, the Court continued to apply a simplistic concept of how race functions. The …
Who Executes The Executioner? Impeachment, Indictment And Other Alternatives To Assassination, Jay S. Bybee
Who Executes The Executioner? Impeachment, Indictment And Other Alternatives To Assassination, Jay S. Bybee
Scholarly Works
This article addresses whether the Constitution protects a sitting President from indictment. The text of the Constitution is not clear on this question as it might be, but it is clear enough. No court has ever addressed the question of the President’s amenability to criminal charges, although the courts have considered the related question of whether federal judges can be subjected to criminal charges. Those courts have answered that judges and other officials are subject to criminal prosecution while in office. Congress has implicitly approved this conclusion in its passage of the Ethics in Government Act with its provision for …
Pitfalls Of Public Policy: The Case Of Arbitration Agreements, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Pitfalls Of Public Policy: The Case Of Arbitration Agreements, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
As the juxtaposition of these quotations suggests, judges have long held disparate views on the legitimacy and value of “public policy” considerations as a basis for legal decision making. The popular notion posits that Justice Holmes and legal realists carried the day, making public policy analysis an ordinary part of the adjudication process. The story, of course, is more complex than this legal version of Don Quixote. Many judges and lawyers, including Justice Holmes in other writings, continued to speak of adjudication in more formalist and positivist terms, with most laypersons in apparent agreement. Judge Burroughs' view of public policy …