Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States
University of Michigan Law School
- Keyword
-
- Police (2)
- Reasonableness (2)
- Age (1)
- Agency conflicts (1)
- Batson v. Kentucky (1)
-
- Bias (1)
- Children (1)
- Collective action (1)
- Competition (1)
- Conflicts of interest (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Fees (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Fund governance (1)
- GPS (1)
- Investments (1)
- J.D.B. v. North Carolina (1)
- Jones v. Harris Association L.P. (1)
- Juries (1)
- Jury selection (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Minorities (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Miranda warnings (1)
- Mutual funds (1)
- Peremtory strikes (1)
- Privacy (1)
- Property (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
J.D.B. V. North Carolina And The Reasonable Person, Christopher Jackson
J.D.B. V. North Carolina And The Reasonable Person, Christopher Jackson
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
This Term, the Supreme Court was presented with a prime opportunity to provide some much-needed clarification on a "backdrop" issue of law-one of many topics that arises in a variety of legal contexts, but is rarely analyzed on its own terms. In J.D.B. v. North Carolina, the Court considered whether age was a relevant factor in determining if a suspect is "in custody" for Miranda purposes, and thus must have her rights read to her before being questioned by the police. Miranda, like dozens of other areas of law, employs a reasonable person test on the custodial question: it asks …
Why Governance Might Work In Mutual Funds, Michael C. Schouten
Why Governance Might Work In Mutual Funds, Michael C. Schouten
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Jones v. Harris Associates L.P. has highlighted the potential for agency conflicts in mutual funds, whose advisors have the de facto power to award themselves high fees. While the surrounding debate has focused on the extent to which market competition replaces the need for fee litigation, there appears to be a growing consensus that fund governance, through the use of voice, is unlikely to be effective. The use of voice is commonly said to be hampered by collective action problems. More recently, scholars have argued that it is further weakened by the easy availability …
How United States V. Jones Can Restore Our Faith In The Fourth Amendment, Erica Goldberg
How United States V. Jones Can Restore Our Faith In The Fourth Amendment, Erica Goldberg
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
United States v. Jones, issued in January of this year, is a landmark case that has the potential to restore a property-based interpretation of the Fourth Amendment to prominence. In 1967, the Supreme Court abandoned its previous Fourth Amendment framework, which had viewed the prohibition on unreasonable searches in light of property and trespass laws, and replaced it with a rule protecting the public’s reasonable expectations of privacy. Although the Court may have intended this reasonable expectations test to provide more protection than a test rooted in property law, the new test in fact made the Justices’ subjective views about …
When Will Race No Longer Matter In Jury Selection?, Bidish Sarma
When Will Race No Longer Matter In Jury Selection?, Bidish Sarma
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
We are coming upon the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Supreme Court's opinion in Batson v. Kentucky, which made clear that our Constitution does not permit prosecutors to remove prospective jurors from the jury pool because of their race. The legal question in Batson-when, if ever, can governmental race discrimination in jury selection be tolerated?-was easy. The lingering factual question, however-when will prosecutors cease to discriminate on the basis of race?-has proven far more difficult to answer. The evidence that district attorneys still exclude minorities because of their race is so compelling that it is tempting to assume that race will …