Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Judges
The Tort Whisperer: Nine Decades Later–My Perspective, Larry M. Roth
The Tort Whisperer: Nine Decades Later–My Perspective, Larry M. Roth
Touro Law Review
This Article provides a comparative analysis of Judge Benjamin Cardozo’s tort decisions in Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., one of his most famous tort decisions, contrasted with a lesser-known tort opinion in Hynes v. New York Central Railroad Co. The Author attempts to address Cardozo’s humanistic and intellectual dichotomies which are exemplified by these two real-life tort precedents—one of which, Palsgraf, most practitioners may only have a distant recall. A historical overview of Cardozo’s life is also discussed. These two decisions portray Cardozo as an emotive human being exercising hit-or-miss judging. This theme provides a differ viewpoint from Cardozo’s …
John Marshall Harlan And Constitutional Adjudication: An Anniversary Rehearing, H. Jefferson Powell
John Marshall Harlan And Constitutional Adjudication: An Anniversary Rehearing, H. Jefferson Powell
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Sandra Day O’Connor’S "First" Principles: A Constructive Vision For An Angry Nation, Lisa Kern Griffin
Sandra Day O’Connor’S "First" Principles: A Constructive Vision For An Angry Nation, Lisa Kern Griffin
Faculty Scholarship
During her 25-year tenure on the Supreme Court, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor cast the decisive votes to resolve the most emotional debates, yet she maintained collegiality among the Justices and retained the public’s high regard. A recent biography by historian and journalist Evan Thomas chronicles her extraordinary personal qualities, remarkable professional journey, and constructive brand of patriotism. This book review essay describes a legacy in three parts: a lived example of how to thrive in the face of challenges, a jurisprudence driven by the courage to make compromises, and a theory about the long game of American democracy. First reintroduces …
Judicial Retirements And The Staying Power Of U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, Stuart M. Benjamin, Georg Vanberg
Judicial Retirements And The Staying Power Of U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, Stuart M. Benjamin, Georg Vanberg
Faculty Scholarship
The influence of U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions depends critically on how these opinions are received and treated by lower courts, which decide the vast majority of legal disputes. We argue that the retirement of Justices on the Supreme Court serves as a simple heuristic device for lower court judges in deciding how much deference to show to Supreme Court precedent. Using a unique dataset of the treatment of all Supreme Court majority opinions in the courts of appeals from 1953 to 2012, we find that negative treatments of Supreme Court opinions increase, and positive treatments decrease, as the Justices …
Brennan V. Scalia, Justice Or Jurisprudence? A Moderate Proposal, Travis A. Knobbe
Brennan V. Scalia, Justice Or Jurisprudence? A Moderate Proposal, Travis A. Knobbe
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Chris Guthrie, Tracey E. George
"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Chris Guthrie, Tracey E. George
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In this Essay--the first in a series of essays designed to reimagine the Supreme Court--we argue that Congress should authorize the Court to adopt, in whole or part, panel decision making... With respect to the prospect of different Court outcomes, we demonstrate empirically in this Essay that the vast majority of cases decided during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries--including "Grutter", "Roe", and "Bush v. Gore" --would have come out the same way if the Court had decided them in panels rather than as a full Court.
Brown And Lawrence (And Goodridge), Michael J. Klarman
Brown And Lawrence (And Goodridge), Michael J. Klarman
Michigan Law Review
One year shy of the fiftieth anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, the Justices issued another equality ruling that is likely to become a historical landmark. In Lawrence v. Texas, the Court invalidated a state law that criminalized same-sex sodomy. This article contrasts these historic rulings along several dimensions, with the aim of shedding light on how Supreme Court Justices decide cases and how Court decisions influence social reform movements. Part I juxtaposes Brown and Lawrence to illustrate how judicial decisionmaking often involves an uneasy reconciliation of traditional legal sources with broader social and political mores and …
Bork Was The Beginning: Constitutional Moralism And The Politics Of Federal Judicial Selection, Gary L. Mcdowell
Bork Was The Beginning: Constitutional Moralism And The Politics Of Federal Judicial Selection, Gary L. Mcdowell
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.