Judges Commons^™

You'll Grow Into It: How Federal And State Courts Have Erred In Excluding Persons Under Twenty-One From 'The People' Protected By The Second Amendment, Ryder Gaenz

FIU Law Review

After more than two centuries of jurisprudential stillness, the United States Supreme Court undertook the task of discerning the Second Amendment’s meaning in District of Columbia v. Heller, holding that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to self-defense. Since Heller, the lower courts have grappled with determining the scope of the Second Amendment. One question of scope—the subject of this piece—is at what age does a person come within the scope of the Second Amendment’s protections? Some federal and state courts have suggested, and in some cases held, that persons under twenty-one do not enjoy Second Amendment rights. However, …

50 Years Of Excellence: A History Of The St. Mary's Law Journal, Barbara Hanson Nellermoe

St. Mary's Law Journal

Founded in 1969, the St. Mary’s Law Journal has climbed the road to excellence. Originally built on the foundation of being a “practitioner’s journal,” the St. Mary’s Law Journal continues to produce quality scholarship that is nationally recognized and frequently used by members of the bench and bar. From its grassroots origins to the world-class law review it is today, the St. Mary’s Law Journal continues to maintain its prestigious position in the realm of law reviews by ranking in the top five percent most-cited law reviews in federal and state courts nationwide.

In celebration of the St. Mary’s Law …

Why The Burger Court Mattered, David A. Strauss

Michigan Law Review

A review of Michael J. Graetz and Linda Greenhouse, The Burger Court and the Rise of the Judicial Right.

Disrespectful Dissent: Justice Scalia's Regrettable Legacy Of Incivility, J. Lyn Entrikin

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Some Kind Of Judge: Henry Friendly And The Law Of Federal Courts, Aaron P. Brecher

Michigan Law Review

Uberfans of the federal judiciary owe a lot to David Dorsen. His illuminating biography of Judge Henry Friendly is a fitting tribute to the contributions of a jurist that many consider to be among the finest judges never to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court. Judicial biography is a difficult genre to do well, and most authors choose to focus on Supreme Court justices. But Henry Friendly, Greatest Judge of His Era is an excellent source of information on Friendly’s life and, far more important, his views on the law and his relationships with some of the most fascinating figures …

But How Will The People Know? Public Opinion As A Meager Influence In Shaping Contemporary Supreme Court Decision Making, Tom Goldstein, Amy Howe

Michigan Law Review

Chief Justice John Roberts famously described the ideal Supreme Court Justice as analogous to a baseball umpire, who simply "applies" the rules, rather than making them. Roberts promised to "remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat." At her own recent confirmation hearings, Elena Kagan demurred, opining that Roberts's metaphor might erroneously suggest that "everything is clear-cut, and that there's no judgment in the process." Based on his 2009 book, The Will of the People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced the Supreme Court and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution, Barry Friedman …

Dear President Bush: Leaving A Legacy On The Federal Bench, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Compensation And The Definition Of Judicial Power In The Early Republic, James E. Pfander

Michigan Law Review

Article III's provision for the compensation of federal judges has been much celebrated for the no-diminution provision that forecloses judicial pay cuts. But other features of Article Ill's compensation provision have largely escaped notice. In particular, little attention has been paid to the framers' apparent expectation that Congress would compensate federal judges with salaries alone, payable from the treasury at stated times. Article III's presumption in favor of salary-based compensation may rule out fee-based compensation, which was a common form of judicial compensation in England and the colonies but had grown controversial by the time of the framing. Among other …

The Judicial Nominations Wars, William P. Marshall

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pragmatism And Parity In Appointments, Yxta Maya Murray

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

This review uses Carter's two foci as a springboard for analyzing the Article II, Section II appointment process. First, Carter's discussion of indecency in modern appointments may be a valuable theoretical insight into the process instead of a mere sociological observation. "Indecency" in appointments, or what is known as "borking" in Carter parlance, may also be a symptom of race and gender bias in the administration of the Article II, Section II power. To ameliorate the effects of this bias, I suggest the incorporation of pragmatism (a thread of philosophical and legal thought) and parity concepts into the existing appointments …

Justices And Presidents: A Political History Of Appointments To The Supreme Court (2d Edition), James S. Portnoy

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court (2d edition) by Henry J. Abraham

Preserving The Progressive Spirit In A Conservative Time: The Joint Reform Efforts Of Justice Brandeis And Professor Frankfurter, 1916-1933, David W. Levy, Bruce Allen Murphy

Michigan Law Review

On January 28, 1916, President Wilson sent the name of Louis D. Brandeis to the Senate for confirmation as a Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Wilson's act surprised many Americans and sparked one of the bitterest confirmation struggles in the history of the Republic. The nomination and the confirmation that followed also created a painful and highly personal dilemma for the new Justice. This dilemma led Brandeis to a private arrangement that opened an unusual and revealing chapter in the story of the extra judicial activities of American justices. Even more important, the arrangement constitutes a noteworthy episode …

Friedman And Israel: The Justices Of The United States Supreme Court, 1789-1969: Their Lives And Major Opinions, Philip B. Kurland

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Justices of the United States Supreme Court, 1789-1969: Their Lives and Major Opinions edited by Leon Friedman and Fred L. Israel