Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Advocacy And Contempt: Constitutional Limitations On The Judicial Contempt Power. Part One: The Conflict Between Advocacy And Contempt, Louis S. Raveson
Advocacy And Contempt: Constitutional Limitations On The Judicial Contempt Power. Part One: The Conflict Between Advocacy And Contempt, Louis S. Raveson
Washington Law Review
The courts' inherent power to punish misconduct that interferes with the judicial process as criminal contempt often conflicts with attorneys' first amendment and due process rights, and their clients' sixth amendment rights to vigorous legal representation. In balancing these competing interests, the Supreme Court has employed seemingly diverse standards to demarcate the constitutional limitations on the substantive scope of the contempt power. Professor Raveson argues that the Constitution should limit the contempt power so that it may only be used to punish actual obstructions of the administration of justice. He maintains that because the goals of our system of justice …
Remarks On Writing Separately, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Remarks On Writing Separately, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Washington Law Review
Judge Ginsburg compares the styles of appellate opinion writing in United States courts and in those of Great Britain and the civil law countries. She describes as a "middle way" the United States practice of opinions for the court, sometimes accompanied by separate concurrences and dissents. This practice, she observes, contrasts with the British tradition of seriatim opinions by each member of the bench, and with the single, anonymous judgment characteristic of civil law systems. While noting that the Anglo-United States practice of writing separately has gained adherents in the civil law world, she concludes that judges in the United …