Law Commons^™

Section 2: Trump And The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

2017-2018 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule And Panel Members, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 3: Business Law Panel, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 5: Criminal Law Panel, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 4: Immigration Law Panel, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 6: Election Law Panel, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Are Critical Area Buffers Unconstitutional? Demystifying The Doctrine Of Unconstitutional Conditions, Brian T. Hodges

Seattle Journal of Environmental Law

Washington’s cities and counties are increasingly demanding that owners of residential shoreline properties dedicate large, predetermined critical area buffers as a mandatory condition of any new development. Such demands, when imposed without regard to the specifics of the land use proposal, would appear to violate the essential nexus and rough proportionality tests established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994). Early decisions from Washington courts faithfully applied these tests, invalidating open space and buffer dedications. But in a series of …

Newsroom: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg To Visit Rwu Law 08-31-2017, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Inimicus Libertatis: Chief Justice Rehnquist’S Majority Or Plurality Opinions In The Field Of Criminal Procedure, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

Since the early 1970’s an increasingly conservative Supreme Court of the United States has been leading this country through a “Criminal Procedure Counterrevolution” (also called “The Rehnquisition”), during which the federal rights and remedies of criminal defendants have been inexorably and significantly eroded. There are numerous books and law review articles discussing this counterrevolution. Chief Justice Rehnquist, the most articulate and ideological of the Courts conservative justices, may properly be regarded as the intellectual founder and leader of this trend in favor of restricting criminal procedure rights.

This article analyzes and provides a bibliography of Supreme Court criminal procedure opinions …

John Marshall, The Great Chief Justice, William & Mary Law School

Popular Media

John Marshall, the nation's fourth chief justice, was among the first to study law at W&M.

The Future Of Class Action Waivers In Employment Agreements: Lewis Creates A Framework For The United States Supreme Court, Meghan Gonyea

Arbitration Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trumping The Ninth Circuit: How The 45th President’S Supreme Court Appointments Will Strengthen The Already Strong Federal Policy Favoring Arbitration, Eric Schleich

Arbitration Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dead Precedents, Riley T. Svikhart

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Part I explores the Roberts Court’s reluctance to overrule Supreme Court precedents more thoroughly. Part II provides a modest account for this phenomenon. Section II.A considers the relationship between the Roberts Court’s reluctance to overrule Supreme Court precedents and its law declaration bent. Section II.B evaluates this reluctance in light of the doctrinal commitment of stare decisis. Finally, Section II.C examines the link between the Roberts Court’s treatment of dying precedents and its trademark adherence to the constitutional avoidance doctrine.

Supreme Court Term In Review: Ot 2016, Donald Roth

Faculty Work Comprehensive List

"Even though the Court is expected to be apolitical, there are many who assume that the judges are beholden to party politics."

Posting about recent major cases before the U.S. Supreme Court from In All Things - an online journal for critical reflection on faith, culture, art, and every ordinary-yet-graced square inch of God’s creation.

http://inallthings.org/supreme-court-term-in-review-ot-2016/

Confirmation Bias, Patrick Barry

Articles

Supreme Court confirmation hearings are vapid. Supreme Court confirmation hearings are pointless. Supreme Court confirmation hearings are harmful to a citizenry already cynical about government. Sentiments like these have been around for decades and are bound to resurface each time a new nomination is made. This essay, however, takes a different view. It argues that Supreme Court confirmation hearings are a valuable form of cultural expression, one that provides a unique record of as the theater critic Martin Esslin might say, a nation thinking about itself in public.

Of Carrots And Sticks: General Jurisdiction And Genuine Consent, Craig Sanders

Northwestern University Law Review

The United States Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman changed how the courts will determine whether companies should be subject to general personal jurisdiction. In 1945, Pennoyer v. Neff’s geographical fixation gave way to International Shoe Co. v. Washington, which provided a test for courts to determine whether corporations had sufficient contact with a forum to meet the bar for personal jurisdiction there. Specific jurisdiction requires “minimum contacts,” provided the action is satisfactorily related to the forum. However, to be subject to general jurisdiction, a corporation must possess more than just “minimum contacts,” and claimants …

Lost At Sea: The Continuing Decline Of The Supreme Court In Admiralty, Michael Sevel

University of Miami Law Review

For the first 200 years of its history, the United States Supreme Court served as the primary leader in the development of, and its cases the primary source of, the admiralty and maritime law of the United States. That appears to be changing. The Court’s admiralty cases over the last quarter century indicate that it is slowly giving up its traditional leading role in creating and developing rules of admiralty law, and instead deferring to Congress to make those rules, a trend that is tantamount to abandoning its Article III constitutional duty to serve as the country’s only national admiralty …

Justice Scalia's Eighth Amendment Jurisprudence: An Unabashed Foe Of Criminal Defendants, Michael Vitiello

Akron Law Review

Justice Scalia’s death has already produced a host of commentary on his career. Depending on the issue, Justice Scalia’s legacy is quite complicated. Justice Scalia’s commitment to originalism explains at least some of his pro-defendant positions. Some of his supporters point to such examples to support a claim that Justice Scalia was principled in his application of his jurisprudential philosophy. However, in one area, Justice Scalia was an unabashed foe of criminal defendants: his Eighth Amendment jurisprudential dealing with terms of imprisonment. There, based on his reading of the historical record, he argued that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel …

Refugee Eo Update: The Supreme Court Hands Each Side A Partial Victory, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Refugee Eo: Hawaii’S Response To The Government’S Request For A Stay, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Hawaii Judge Watson Declines To Clarify Scope Of Preliminary Injunction On Executive Order 13,780, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Implementing The Refugee Eo: The State Department Should Consider Refugee Agency Assurances As Bona Fide Relationships, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Scotus's 2016-17 Term: The Calm Before The Storm?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “The court's just-completed 2016-17 term contained no . . . blockbusters. Its highest profile ruling was an unsigned opinion that modified preliminary injunctions issued by lower courts to prevent President Donald Trump's "travel ban" orders from going into immediate effect.

But that ruling did not decide whether the president's orders are in fact unconstitutional. Instead, the court put that important question off until the fall, by which time further factual developments -for example, the executive branch completing its review and deciding to lift or modify the bans -may well render the issue moot.”

A Textual Analysis Of Whistleblower Protections Under The Dodd-Frank Act, Brent T. Murphy

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note endorses the reasoning of the Fifth Circuit in Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), L.L.C., and argues that the plain language of Dodd-Frank limits its whistleblower protections to individuals who provide information to the SEC. This Note argues that the reasoning of the Second Circuit in Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy LLC relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in King v. Burwell is inapposite, and that the Second Circuit introduced ambiguity where no ambiguity previously existed and improperly extended Chevron deference to the SEC.

Mad Men And Dead Men: Justification For Regulation Of Computer-Generated Images Of Deceased Celebrity Endorsers, Kerry Barrett

Cleveland State Law Review

Pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is charged with consumer protection through the prohibition of unfair and deceptive trade practices. An unfair and deceptive trade practice is gaining in prominence and has not yet been subjected to FTC regulation. Computer-generated imagery (CGIs) of deceased celebrity endorsers are misleading to consumers and constitute a false advertisement. This Note evaluates how digitally resurrected endorsers pervert the consumer decision-making process through analysis of issue-relevant thinking, the match-up hypothesis, event-study analysis, social adaptation theory, and transfer theory. This Note also accounts for the macroeconomic effect of regulation of …

Justice Scalia And Tonto Fistfight In Heaven, Ray Martin

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Implementing The Refugee Eo: Add Grandparents, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Examining Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission V. School District Of Philadelphia: Considering How The Supreme Court’S Waning Support Of School Desegregation Affected Desegregation Efforts Based On State Law, Steven L. Nelson, Alison C. Tyler

Seattle University Law Review

This study examines the enforcement of desegregation orders mandated under state law as a result of the Supreme Court’s handling of school desegregation cases at the federal level. The Article tracks the development of school desegregation cases starting shortly before Brown v. Board of Education and continues through the recent voluntary school desegregation case, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. The Article establishes four distinct generations of school desegregation cases at the federal level and determines that the political tides created, in large part, by the U.S. Supreme Court’s handling of federal school desegregation cases …

The Travel Ban In The Supreme Court: Crafting A Workable Remedy, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Doctrine In The Trenches: The Case Of Collateral Estoppel, John Bernard Corr

John (Bernie) Corr

No abstract provided.