Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- African American (1)
- Article III (1)
- Congress (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional departmentalism (1)
-
- Constitutional departmentalists (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Constitutional interpretive authority (1)
- Criminal Justice System (1)
- Death Penalty (1)
- Dilemmas (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Executive branch (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Force Confessions (1)
- Fourth Circuit (1)
- John locke (1)
- Judge Roger Gregory (1)
- Judicial branch (1)
- Judicial independence (1)
- Judicial power (1)
- Judicial supremacists (1)
- Legislative branch (1)
- Politics (1)
- Popular sovereignty (1)
- President (1)
- Racism (1)
- Revolution principle (1)
- Search (1)
- Seizure (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Antiracism In Action, Daniel Harawa, Brandon Hasbrouck
Antiracism In Action, Daniel Harawa, Brandon Hasbrouck
Washington and Lee Law Review
Racism pervades the criminal legal system, influencing everything from who police stop and search, to who prosecutors charge, to what punishments courts apply. The Supreme Court’s fixation on colorblind application of the Constitution gives judges license to disregard the role race plays in the criminal legal system, and all too often, they do. Yet Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory challenges the facially race-neutral reasoning of criminal justice actors, often applying ostensibly colorblind scrutiny to achieve a color-conscious jurisprudence. Nor is he afraid of engaging directly in a frank discussion of the racial realities of America, rebuking those within the system …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky
Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky
Seattle University Law Review
This Article explores what we coin “rock and hard place” (RHP) arguments in the law, and it aims to motivate mission-driven plaintiffs to seek out such arguments in their cases. The RHP argument structure helps plaintiffs win cases even when the court views that outcome as unfavorable.
We begin by dissecting RHP dilemmas that have long existed in the American legal system. As Part I reveals, prosecutors and law enforcement officials have often taken advantage of RHP dilemmas and used them as a tool to persuade criminal defendants to forfeit their constitutional rights, confess, or give up the chance to …
The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum
The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
This article enters into the modern debate between “consti- tutional departmentalists”—who contend that the executive and legislative branches share constitutional interpretive authority with the courts—and what are sometimes called “judicial supremacists.” After exploring the relevant history of political ideas, I join the modern minority of voices in the latter camp.
This is an intellectual history of two evolving political ideas—popular sovereignty and the separation of powers—which merged in the making of American judicial power, and I argue we can only understand the structural function of judicial review by bringing these ideas together into an integrated whole. Or, put another way, …