Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (54)
- Courts (18)
- Law and Race (17)
- Constitutional Law (16)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (14)
-
- Legislation (14)
- Fourteenth Amendment (13)
- Criminal Procedure (10)
- Election Law (10)
- Intellectual Property Law (10)
- Criminal Law (7)
- Law and Politics (7)
- Legal History (7)
- State and Local Government Law (7)
- Evidence (4)
- Judges (4)
- Civil Procedure (2)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (2)
- Education Law (2)
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (2)
- European Law (2)
- Food and Drug Law (2)
- International Law (2)
- Jurisdiction (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Labor and Employment Law (2)
- Litigation (2)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Family Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (20)
- Articles (12)
- Supreme Court Preview (8)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (6)
- Publications (4)
-
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (3)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (2)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (2)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (2)
- Book Chapters (1)
- Congressional Testimony (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Student Thesis Honors (1996-2008) (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 61 - 64 of 64
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Particular Intentions": The Hillmon Case And The Supreme Court, Marianne Wesson
"Particular Intentions": The Hillmon Case And The Supreme Court, Marianne Wesson
Publications
The case of Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hillmon is one of the most influential decisions in the law of evidence. Decided by the Supreme Court in 1892, it invented an exception to the hearsay rule for statements encompassing the intentions of the declarant. But this exception seems not to rest on any plausible theory of the categorical reliability of such statements. This article suggests that the case turned instead on the Court's attachment to a particular narrative about the events that gave rise to the case, events that produced a corpse of disputed identity. The author's investigations into newspaper …
Post-Admissions Educational Programming In A Post-Grutter World: A Response To Professor Brown, Evan H. Caminker
Post-Admissions Educational Programming In A Post-Grutter World: A Response To Professor Brown, Evan H. Caminker
Articles
When asked to provide commentary on another scholar's reflections on Grutterl and Gratz and affirmative action, I am usually struck by two fears. First, because so much ink has been spilled on this topic, I worry the main presenter will have nothing new and interesting to say. Today this worry has been put to rest; I am so pleased that Professor Dorothy Brown offers a number of novel and intriguing observations and, in the end, advances a novel and intriguing proposal about the role Critical Race Theory ought to play in our nation's law school classrooms. Second, for the same …
Souter Passant, Scalia Rampant: Combat In The Marsh, Samuel R. Gross
Souter Passant, Scalia Rampant: Combat In The Marsh, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
Kansas law provides that unless a capital sentencing jury concludes that the mitigating factors that apply to the defendant’s crime outweigh the aggravating factors, it must sentence the defendant to death. The Kansas Supreme Court held that this law violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because it “impermissibly mandates the death penalty when the jury finds that the mitigating and aggravating circumstances are in equipoise.” On June 26, in Kansas v. Marsh, the Supreme Court reversed in a 5 to 4 opinion by Justice Thomas.
But I Didn't Do Anything Wrong: Revisiting The Rights Of Non-Offending Parents In Child Protection Proceedings, Vivek Sankaran
But I Didn't Do Anything Wrong: Revisiting The Rights Of Non-Offending Parents In Child Protection Proceedings, Vivek Sankaran
Articles
Steven, a minor living with his mother, enjoyed a nurturing relationship with his father, Mark. He saw his father every weekend and looked forward to their time together. Mark looked for ways in which to stay involved in his child's life. Two days ago, the Department of Human Services (DHS) removed Steven from his mother's custody because, unbeknown to Mark, Stevens mother was selling drugs in the home. At the time of removal, the police did not inquire about the whereabouts of Stevens father; DHS immediately placed Steven in a foster home.