Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Oklahoma V. Castro-Huerta, Jurisdictional Overlap, Competitive Sovereign Erosion, And The Fundamental Freedom Of Sovereign Nations, Michael D.O. Rusco
Oklahoma V. Castro-Huerta, Jurisdictional Overlap, Competitive Sovereign Erosion, And The Fundamental Freedom Of Sovereign Nations, Michael D.O. Rusco
Marquette Law Review
In addition to its stunning internal flaws, the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta exemplifies Indian law’s broader flaws as a jurisprudence. Castro-Huerta holds that states have concurrent criminal jurisdiction with federal and tribal governments over crimes by non-Indians against Indians on reservation lands. Justice Gorsuch deftly addresses many of the glaring internal flaws in Kavanaugh’s majority opinion, but not all. He does not dissect the hollow assertion that reservations are part of the surrounding state both geographically and politically. This cannot go unaddressed, particularly given its weak analysis, misguided use of precedent, and broader consequences.
The Necessary Narrowing Of General Personal Jurisdiction, William Grayson Lambert
The Necessary Narrowing Of General Personal Jurisdiction, William Grayson Lambert
Marquette Law Review
General personal jurisdiction allows a court to issue a binding judgment against a defendant in any case, even if the facts giving rise to the case are unrelated to that forum. In the six decades after International Shoe v. Washington, courts held that general jurisdiction existed whenever a defendant had substantial continuous and systemic contacts with the forum. This rule was narrowed significantly in 2011, however, when the Supreme Court in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown held that general jurisdiction was properly exercised only when a defendant had sufficient contacts to be “at home” in the forum.
The Forgotten Jurisprudential Debate: Catholic Legal Thought's Response To Legal Realism, John M. Breen, Lee J. Strang
The Forgotten Jurisprudential Debate: Catholic Legal Thought's Response To Legal Realism, John M. Breen, Lee J. Strang
Marquette Law Review
none
Fielding An Excellent Team: Law Clerk Selection And Chambers Structure At The U.S. Supreme Court, Christopher D. Kromphardt
Fielding An Excellent Team: Law Clerk Selection And Chambers Structure At The U.S. Supreme Court, Christopher D. Kromphardt
Marquette Law Review
Supreme Court Justices exercise wide discretion when hiring law clerks. The Justices are constrained only by the pool of qualified applicants and by norms of the institution, such as that beginning with Chief Justice Burger’s tenure in 1969 90% of clerks have previously served a clerkship with a federal judge. Previous work finds that ideology structures hiring decisions at the individual clerk level; however, these analyses fail to account for the fact that a Justice hires several clerks each Term—he seeks a winning team, not just a single all-star. Hiring decisions are structuring decisions in which one of a Justice’s …