Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (12)
- Constitutional Law (10)
- Judges (6)
- First Amendment (5)
- Jurisprudence (4)
-
- Law and Society (4)
- Legal Remedies (4)
- Civil Law (3)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (3)
- Legislation (3)
- Second Amendment (3)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (3)
- Civil Procedure (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Intellectual Property Law (2)
- Law and Economics (2)
- Law and Philosophy (2)
- Litigation (2)
- Political Science (2)
- President/Executive Department (2)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (2)
- Rule of Law (2)
- State and Local Government Law (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Agency (1)
- American Politics (1)
- Business (1)
- Common Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 20 of 20
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2020-2021, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute
Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2020-2021, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute
SCI Papers & Reports
During the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2020—corresponding to the 2020-2021 academic year— the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 57 of the 58 cases argued at the Supreme Court, offered our annual press and student term preview programs, and continued to integrate the moot court program into the Law Center curriculum. As in past Terms, the varied affiliations of advocates mooted reflect SCI’s commitment to assist advocates without regard to the party represented or the position advanced.
Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court took the unprecedented step of hosting all OT 2020 …
Justifying The Supreme Court’S Standards Of Review, R. Randall Kelso
Justifying The Supreme Court’S Standards Of Review, R. Randall Kelso
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming.
Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California And Its Implications, Brian Wolfman
Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California And Its Implications, Brian Wolfman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Trump Administration's effort to get rid of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, failed before the Supreme Court in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 140 S. Ct. 1891, 1896 (2020). In this essay -- based on a presentation given to an American Bar Association section in September 2020 -- I review DACA, the Supreme Court's decision, and its potential legal implications.
The failure of the Trump Administration to eliminate DACA may have had significant political consequences, and it surely had immediate and momentous consequences for many of DACA’s hundreds of thousands …
The Federalist Society And Constitutional Interpretation: Who Gets To Say What The Constitution Says, Deborah L. Toscano
The Federalist Society And Constitutional Interpretation: Who Gets To Say What The Constitution Says, Deborah L. Toscano
University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations
The Federalist Society was organized in 1982 by conservative law students to counteract what they perceived to be a liberal bias in law schools, the courts, and government administration. Forty years later there is an acknowledgement of a rightward turn in the Supreme Court which scholars have attributed in part to the efforts of the Federalist Society. However, there is still little understanding of just how that change came about. This dissertation takes a step toward understanding that question. Viewing the Federalist Society as the center of a network of lawyers, think tanks, and legal institutions, I examine the influence …
“She Blinded Me With Science”: The Use Of Science Frames In Abortion Litigation Before The Supreme Court, Laura Moyer
“She Blinded Me With Science”: The Use Of Science Frames In Abortion Litigation Before The Supreme Court, Laura Moyer
Faculty Scholarship
While much of the work on amicus briefs focuses on whether such briefs affect Supreme Court outcomes or doctrine, much less is known about the content of these briefs, particularly how groups opt to frame issues as part of their litigation strategy. In this study, I leverage an approach to content analysis that has previously been used to analyze judicial opinions and use it to assess the frames used by amicus groups in a single policy area over four decades. Using an original dataset of amicus briefs filed in Supreme Court cases on the right to abortion, I test the …
Confrontation's Multi-Analyst Problem, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman
Confrontation's Multi-Analyst Problem, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Confrontation Clause in the Sixth Amendment affords the “accused” in “criminal prosecutions” the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against” them. A particular challenge for courts over at least the last decade-plus has been the degree to which the Confrontation Clause applies to forensic reports, such as those presenting the results of a DNA, toxicology, or other CSI-type analysis. Should use of forensic reports entitle criminal defendants to confront purportedly “objective” analysts from the lab producing the report? If so, which analyst or analysts? For forensic processes that require multiple analysts, should the prosecution be required to produce …
The Militia: A Definition And Litmus Test, Marcus Armstrong
The Militia: A Definition And Litmus Test, Marcus Armstrong
St. Mary's Law Journal
The United States Supreme Court, in its decision in Perpich v. Department of Defense, ruled that members of the National Guard are “troops” as that word is used in the Constitution. In doing so, the Court negated a long-standing, but obsolete, definition of the militia. However, this move away from an obsolete definition of the militia posed considerable difficulties that the Court was unable to rectify in its Perpich decision. In this Article, the author hopes to help rectify these difficulties by proposing four necessary characteristics that define the militia: first, the militia is a military force; second, the …
Self-Determination In American Discourse: The Supreme Court’S Historical Indoctrination Of Free Speech And Expression, Jarred Williams
Self-Determination In American Discourse: The Supreme Court’S Historical Indoctrination Of Free Speech And Expression, Jarred Williams
Honors Theses
Within the American criminal legal system, it is a well-established practice to presume the innocence of those charged with criminal offenses unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Such a judicial framework-like approach, called a legal maxim, is utilized in order to ensure that the law is applied and interpreted in ways that legislative bodies originally intended.
The central aim of this piece in relation to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution is to investigate whether the Supreme Court of the United States has utilized a specific legal maxim within cases that dispute government speech or expression regulation. …
Is There A New Extraterritoriality In Intellectual Property?, Timothy R. Holbrook
Is There A New Extraterritoriality In Intellectual Property?, Timothy R. Holbrook
Faculty Articles
This Article proceeds as follows. Part I discusses the state of the law of extraterritoriality in copyright, trademark, and patent, as it stood before the Supreme Court’s recent intervention. This review demonstrates that all three disciplines were treating extraterritoriality very differently, and none were paying much attention to the presumption against extraterritoriality. Part II reviews a tetralogy of recent Supreme Court cases, describing the Court’s attempt to formalize its approach to extraterritoriality across all fields of law. Part III analyzes the state of IP law in the aftermath of this tetralogy of extraterritoriality cases. It concludes that there has been …
Amen Over All Men: The Supreme Court’S Preservation Of Religious Rights And What That Means For Fulton V. City Of Philadelphia, Christopher Manettas
Amen Over All Men: The Supreme Court’S Preservation Of Religious Rights And What That Means For Fulton V. City Of Philadelphia, Christopher Manettas
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Oral Argument In The Time Of Covid: The Chief Plays Calvinball, Matthew Sag, Tonja Jacobi, Timothy R. Johnson, Eve M. Ringsmuth
Oral Argument In The Time Of Covid: The Chief Plays Calvinball, Matthew Sag, Tonja Jacobi, Timothy R. Johnson, Eve M. Ringsmuth
Faculty Publications & Other Works
In this Article, we empirically assess the Supreme Court’s experiment in hearing telephonic oral arguments. We compare the telephonic hearings to those heard in-person by the current Court and examine whether the justices followed norms of fairness and equality. We show that the telephonic forum changed the dynamics of oral argument in a way that gave the Chief Justice new power, and that Chief Justice Roberts, knowingly or unknowingly, used that new power to benefit his ideological allies. We also show that the Chief interrupted the female justices disproportionately more than the male justices and gave the male justices more …
Witness For The Self: Miranda V. Arizona’S Political Theology, Graham James Mcaleer
Witness For The Self: Miranda V. Arizona’S Political Theology, Graham James Mcaleer
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why Do The Poor Not Have A Constitutional Right To File Civil Claims In Court Under Their First Amendment Right To Petition The Government For A Redress Of Grievances?, Henry Rose
Seattle University Law Review
Since 1963, the United States Supreme Court has recognized a constitutional right for American groups, organizations, and persons to pursue civil litigation under the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. However, in three cases involving poor plaintiffs decided by the Supreme Court in the early 1970s—Boddie v. Connecticut,2 United States v. Kras,3 and Ortwein v. Schwab4—the Supreme Court rejected arguments that all persons have a constitutional right to access courts to pursue their civil legal claims.5 In the latter two cases, Kras and Ortwein, the Supreme Court concluded that poor persons were properly barred from …
Neither Safe, Nor Legal, Nor Rare: The D.C. Circuit’S Use Of The Doctrine Of Ratification To Shield Agency Action From Appointments Clause Challenges, Damien M. Schiff
Neither Safe, Nor Legal, Nor Rare: The D.C. Circuit’S Use Of The Doctrine Of Ratification To Shield Agency Action From Appointments Clause Challenges, Damien M. Schiff
Seattle University Law Review
Key to the constitutional design of the federal government is the separation of powers. An important support for that separation is the Appointments Clause, which governs how officers of the United States are installed in their positions. Although the separation of powers generally, and the Appointments Clause specifically, support democratically accountable government, they also protect individual citizens against abusive government power. But without a judicial remedy, such protection is ineffectual—a mere parchment barrier.
Such has become the fate of the Appointments Clause in the D.C. Circuit, thanks to that court’s adoption—and zealous employment—of the rule that agency action, otherwise unconstitutional …
Restoring Trust In The Judiciary: A Critical, High Priority Project For The Biden Administration, Richard C. Cahn
Restoring Trust In The Judiciary: A Critical, High Priority Project For The Biden Administration, Richard C. Cahn
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Comic Books, The First Amendment, And The “Best Test” For Right Of Publicity Issues, Rachel Silverstein
Comic Books, The First Amendment, And The “Best Test” For Right Of Publicity Issues, Rachel Silverstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Of Arms And The Militia: Gun Regulation By Defining “Ordinary Military Equipment”, Edward J. Curtis
Of Arms And The Militia: Gun Regulation By Defining “Ordinary Military Equipment”, Edward J. Curtis
Touro Law Review
Recent mass shootings have placed pressure on Congress and state legislatures to regulate semi-automatic rifles and handguns in the interest of public safety. However, the Second Amendment provides that, “[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. There is no obvious public safety exception.
Semi-automatic rifles, handguns, and other kinds of arms can be regulated more effectively by defining the “ordinary military equipment” militia members are expected to provide. This may be accomplished using the rationale employed by the United States …
Evolution Of Legal Topics, Rights And Obligations In The United States, Roberto Rosas
Evolution Of Legal Topics, Rights And Obligations In The United States, Roberto Rosas
Faculty Articles
What new constitutional rights does the American Legal system have to offer? The United States Constitution is a document that continues to be interpreted every year. The Supreme Court hears recent cases with the purpose of interpreting the meaning of the Constitution. Since the creation of the Supreme Court, the Constitution has been analyzed in different ways – some interpretations lasting decades and some amendments going through changes depending on the different ideologies of the Justices on the Court.
This article discusses some of the rights established by the Supreme Court from 2016 to 2019 and provides the background as …
Court Packing Is A Chimera, Brian L. Frye
Court Packing Is A Chimera, Brian L. Frye
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
The dream of the 1930s is alive in Washington. Democrats see
Republicans hemorrhaging voters as Trump struggles with the
economy and the pandemic and are salivating at the prospect of
retaking not only the White House, but also the Senate. Of course, you
should never sell a bearskin until you've caught the bear. But even a
blowout victory can't get Democrats the prize they really want, a
Supreme Court majority. So, in back-to-the-future fashion, many
progressives are pushing the idea of court packing. After all, in politics,
rules are made to be broken.
Supreme Court Reform And American Democracy, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
Supreme Court Reform And American Democracy, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
Scholarship@WashULaw
In "How to Save the Supreme Court," we identified the legitimacy challenge facing the Court, traced it to a set of structural flaws, and proposed novel reforms. Little more than a year later, the conversation around Supreme Court reform has only grown louder and more urgent. In this Essay, we continue that conversation by engaging with critics of our approach. The current crisis of the Supreme Court is, we argue, inextricable from the question of the Supreme Court’s proper role in our democracy. For those interested in reform, there are three distinct strategies for ensuring the Supreme Court maintains its …