Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Judges (2)
- ALIEN TERRORIST REMOVAL COURT (1)
- ALJ (1)
- APA (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
-
- Administrative law (1)
- Administrative law judge (1)
- Administrative structures (1)
- Agencies (1)
- Appointment (1)
- Appointments clause (1)
- Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure (1)
- Capture critique (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Courts (1)
- D.C. Circuit Court (1)
- District Courts (1)
- District of Arizona (1)
- Due process (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Federal bench (1)
- Free Enterprise Fund (1)
- Hearing Examiners (1)
- Hoover Commission (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- Inferior officers (1)
- Interbranch appointment (1)
- Judicial selection (1)
- Judicial vacancy (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Combating Terrorism With The Alien Terrorist Removal Court, Jonathan Yu
Combating Terrorism With The Alien Terrorist Removal Court, Jonathan Yu
Jonathan Yu
No abstract provided.
The Hearing Examiners And The Administrative Procedure Act, 1937-1960, Joanna L. Grisinger
The Hearing Examiners And The Administrative Procedure Act, 1937-1960, Joanna L. Grisinger
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Resolving The Alj Quandary, Kent Barnett
Resolving The Alj Quandary, Kent Barnett
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
Three competing constitutional and practical concerns surround federal administrative law judges (“ALJs”), who preside over all formal adjudications within the executive branch. First, if ALJs are “inferior Officers” (not mere employees), as five current Supreme Court Justices have suggested, the current method of selecting many ALJs likely violates the Appointments Clause. Second, a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision reserved the question whether the statutory protections that prevent ALJs from being fired at will impermissibly impinge upon the President’s supervisory power under Article II. Third, these same protections from removal may, on the other hand, be too limited to satisfy impartiality …
Judicial Influence And The United States Federal District Courts: A Case Study, Justin R. Hickerson
Judicial Influence And The United States Federal District Courts: A Case Study, Justin R. Hickerson
Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects
No abstract provided.
The Unitary Executive And The Plural Judiciary: On The Potential Virtues Of Decentralized Judicial Power, Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr.
The Unitary Executive And The Plural Judiciary: On The Potential Virtues Of Decentralized Judicial Power, Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr.
Notre Dame Law Review
The federal judiciary features a highly decentralized system of courts. The Supreme Court of the United States reviews only a few dozen cases each year. Meanwhile, regional U.S. courts of appeals operate independently of each other; district courts further divide and separate the exercise of federal judicial power. The role of the state courts in enforcing federal law further subdivides responsibility for the adjudication of federal law claims. Indeed, the Office of Chief Justice itself incorporates and reflects this vesting of the judicial power of the United States exclusively in collegial institutions—literally in a multiplicity of hands—effectively precluding its unilateral …
Filling The District Of Arizona Vacancies, Carl W. Tobias
Filling The District Of Arizona Vacancies, Carl W. Tobias
Law Faculty Publications
The judicial vacancy crisis must end. The federal bench has experienced nearly a ten percent vacancy rate over an unprecedented four and a half-year period. The substantial number and protracted character of those openings have imposed numerous detrimental effects. These phenomena have delayed the scheduling of jury trials in many civil cases and even propelled termination of some litigation because the Speedy Trial Act requires that criminal matters have precedence. Indeed, the emergency designation has meant that some criminal proceedings were delayed in the Arizona District. The vacancy crisis places additional pressure on sitting judges, particularly the eight senior judges …
Considering Patricia Millett For The D.C. Circuit, Carl W. Tobias
Considering Patricia Millett For The D.C. Circuit, Carl W. Tobias
Law Faculty Publications
On June 4, Obama nominated three individuals: Patricia Millett, who has argued 32 Supreme Court appeals, Cornelia Pillard, who has won landmark High Court victories, and Robert Wilkins, who had served as a D.C. District Court judge for three years. The court’s allegedly smaller caseloads prompted Republicans to halt yes or no votes for all the nominees. But because well-qualified, moderate nominees warrant thorough consideration and final ballots, their Senate review deserves analysis, which this paper conducts by emphasizing Millett. It first surveys the nominee’s process and then shows how her evaluation concluded.