Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Law (2)
- Supreme Court Justices (2)
- Bicentennial of the Constitution (1)
- Confirmation process (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
-
- Courts (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Diminished capacity (1)
- Emergency Powers (1)
- Federal sentencing guidelines (1)
- Independent counsel (1)
- Insurance (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Malpractice (1)
- Malpractice insurance (1)
- Medical (1)
- Nominating and confirming Supreme Court Justices (1)
- Sentencing (1)
- Special division (1)
- Steel Mills (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Supreme Court nominees (1)
- War Powers (1)
- Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (343 U.S. 579 (1952)) (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Steel Seizure Case: One Of A Kind?, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher
The Steel Seizure Case: One Of A Kind?, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
A Roundtable Discussion With Stephen L. Carter & Michael J. Gerhardt, Thomas E. Baker
A Roundtable Discussion With Stephen L. Carter & Michael J. Gerhardt, Thomas E. Baker
Faculty Publications
Transcript of a discussion regarding the United States Supreme Court, the Supreme Court justices and justice nominees, the Senate process for confirming nominees and related issues such as fitness to serve on the court and judicial activism.
A Symposium Précis, Thomas E. Baker
A Symposium Précis, Thomas E. Baker
Faculty Publications
This article is an introduction and overview of the Drake University Law School symposium Judicious Choices: Nominating and Confirming Supreme Court Justices held in March of 2002. It identifies important constitutional law issues in nominating and confirming the President's appointments to Supreme Court Justices in the United States.
The Role Of Jury In Modern Malpractice Law, Philip G. Peters Jr.
The Role Of Jury In Modern Malpractice Law, Philip G. Peters Jr.
Faculty Publications
This article explores the policy issues raised by the choice between a custom-based standard of care and a jury-determined reasonability standard. The author examines not only traditional legal arguments but also the recent findings of cognitive psychology, jury performance studies, and health industry research. Not surprisingly, this analysis reveals that both options are imperfect. However, the author cautiously recommends the reasonable physician standard. The revolutionary transformation of the health care industry in last quarter of a century has transferred considerable power from physicians to the health insurance industry, an industry that has not yet earned the privilege of self-regulation. Unlike …
Special Division Agonistes, John Q. Barrett
Special Division Agonistes, John Q. Barrett
Faculty Publications
When the independent counsel law sank, the casualties included a special "division" of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. This division was the special court that Congress had created "for the purpose of appointing independent counsels." The now-expired 1994 independent counsel statute had, like its three predecessors, directed the Chief Justice of the United States to appoint three judges from the Supreme Court and/or the federal Courts of Appeals to serve on the special court for two-year terms. This independent counsel court, which was located for administrative purposes in the United States Court of …
Insubstantial Questions And Federal Jurisdiction, Jonathan L. Entin
Insubstantial Questions And Federal Jurisdiction, Jonathan L. Entin
Faculty Publications
This article seeks to clear up the confusion over "substantial federal questions." Part I provides an overview of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction, distinguishing between appeal and certiorari. Part II examines the precedential weight of the Court's summary dispositions, contrasting summary disposition of appeals with denials of certiorari. Part III explains why the suggestions that the lower courts lack jurisdiction over cases presenting issues in which the Supreme Court has dismissed appeals "for want of a substantial federal question" are mistaken.
Past Violence, Future Danger?: Rethinking Diminished Capacity Departures Under Federal Sentencing Guidelines Section 5k2.13, Eva E. Subotnik
Past Violence, Future Danger?: Rethinking Diminished Capacity Departures Under Federal Sentencing Guidelines Section 5k2.13, Eva E. Subotnik
Faculty Publications
Under section 5K2.13 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, a judge is permitted to reduce a defendant's sentence on the grounds of diminished capacity. Most courts construing this provision have ruled that defendants whose offenses involved violence or the threat of violence are ineligible for a reduction in sentence. This Note argues that such an interpretation, which makes past violence a proxy for predicting future dangerousness, is problematic. Medically or psychologically treated, defendants may no longer pose a danger to society. This Note urges that, in accordance with section 5K2.13's language and history, courts should focus more broadly on whether the …