Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Federalism (2)
- Amicus curiae (1)
- Balancing test (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Congressional intent (1)
-
- Constitution (1)
- Court (1)
- Distribution of powers (1)
- Doctrine (1)
- Equity (1)
- FTCA (1)
- Federal (1)
- Federal Tort Claims Act (1)
- Henry clay (1)
- INS (1)
- Immigration (1)
- John marshall (1)
- Journalism (1)
- Journalist (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Judiciary (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Law (1)
- Laws (1)
- Litigation (1)
- O’connor (1)
- Press (1)
- Religious expression (1)
- Religious freedom (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Faculty Publications
In spring 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two consolidated cases construing the Federal Tort Claims Act, U.S. v. Kwai Fun Wong and U.S. v June, Conservator. The Court majority, 5-4, per Justice Kagan, ruled in favor of the claimants and against the Government in both cases. On the face of the majority opinions, Wong and June come off as straightforward matters of statutory construction. But under the surface, the cases gave the Court a chance to wrestle with fundamental questions of statutory interpretation. The divide in Wong and June concerns the role of the courts vis-à-vis Congress — one …
Bringing Light To The Halls Of Shadow, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Bringing Light To The Halls Of Shadow, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Faculty Publications
Appellate judges operate in the shadows. Though they don’t see it that way. “We are judged by what we write,” said U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. True too, court proceedings and records are presumptively open to the public. The West Wing of the White House is certainly not so vulnerable to public scrutiny, and the backrooms of legislative chambers are famously smoke-filled. Yet the parts of court activity that we see and hear seem only to whet our appetite for the rest of the process. In this Preface, the author introduces the subject of the journalist and the court, …
A Matter Of Power: Structural Federalism And Separation Doctrine In The Present, Frances Howell Rudko
A Matter Of Power: Structural Federalism And Separation Doctrine In The Present, Frances Howell Rudko
Faculty Publications
Public reaction to the 1823 Supreme Court decision in Green v. Biddle prompted John Marshall’s letter to Henry Clay, who had argued the case as amicus curiae for the defendant. The letter is significant because Marshall, who had been a legislator himself, candidly expresses not only his personal dissatisfaction with the congressional assault on the 1823 decision but also the constitutional basis for his opinion. The significance of Marshall’s extrajudicial opinion becomes more apparent when it is considered in the aftermath of the recent tug-of-war between Congress and the Court which culminated in the decision in City of Boerne v. …