Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Blackstone (1)
- Case or controversy (1)
- Chief Justice Roberts (1)
- Commentaries (1)
-
- Common law (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Exposition (1)
- Expound (1)
- Expounding (1)
- Friendly (Henry) (1)
- History (1)
- Influence (1)
- Jefferson (1)
- John G. Roberts Jr. (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial Statistics (1)
- Judicial decisionmaking (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Kamper v. Hawkins (1)
- Law and culture (1)
- Law and humanities (1)
- Legal authority (1)
- Legal history (1)
- Madison (1)
- Non-enforcement (1)
- Original intent (1)
- Originalism (1)
- Political Appointments (1)
- Politics; Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Judicial Review And Non-Enforcement At The Founding, Matthew J. Steilen
Judicial Review And Non-Enforcement At The Founding, Matthew J. Steilen
Journal Articles
This Article examines the relationship between judicial review and presidential non-enforcement of statutory law. Defenders of non-enforcement regularly argue that the justification for judicial review that prevailed at the time of the founding also justifies the president in declining to enforce unconstitutional laws. The argument is unsound. This Article shows that there is essentially no historical evidence, from ratification through the first decade under the Constitution, in support of a non-enforcement power. It also shows that the framers repeatedly made statements inconsistent with the supposition that the president could refuse to enforce laws he deemed unconstitutional. In contrast, during this …
Reconceptualizing The Judicial Activism Debate As Judicial Responsibility: A Tale Of Two Justice Kennedys, Eric J. Segall
Reconceptualizing The Judicial Activism Debate As Judicial Responsibility: A Tale Of Two Justice Kennedys, Eric J. Segall
Eric J. Segall
The academic and political debate over judicial activism has been based on the overriding but patently false assumption that the Supreme Court’s performance can be measured by examining the results that it reaches in constitutional cases. When scholars and politicians equate judicial activism with judicial invalidation of the works of the political branches or the reversal of precedent, however, these commentators don’t reveal anything different than would a pure descriptive account of the Court’s decision and rationale. Moreover, the judicial activism debate is unhelpful because the ambiguous sources of constitutional interpretation cannot privilege fundamental baselines or generate consensus over correct …
Supreme Court Justices: The Case For Hanging It Up, Eric J. Segall
Supreme Court Justices: The Case For Hanging It Up, Eric J. Segall
Eric J. Segall
No abstract provided.
Health Care, Immigration, And Voting: The Supreme Court And Judicial Power, Eric J. Segall
Health Care, Immigration, And Voting: The Supreme Court And Judicial Power, Eric J. Segall
Eric J. Segall
No abstract provided.
Following Lower-Court Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Following Lower-Court Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
This Article examines the role of lower-court precedent in the US Supreme Court’s decisions. The Supreme Court is rarely the first court to consider a legal question, and therefore the Court has the opportunity to be informed by and perhaps even persuaded by the views of the various lower courts that have previously addressed the issue. This Article considers whether the Court should give weight to lower-court precedent as a matter of normative theory and whether the Court in fact does so as a matter of practice. To answer the normative question, this Article analyzes a variety of potential reasons …
Personal Is Political For Roberts Court, Eric J. Segall
Personal Is Political For Roberts Court, Eric J. Segall
Faculty Publications By Year
No abstract provided.
Some Kind Of Judge: Henry Friendly And The Law Of Federal Courts, Aaron P. Brecher
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 …
In Search Of Justice: An Examination Of The Appointments Of John G. Roberts And Samuel A. Alito To The U.S. Supreme Court And Their Impact On American Jurisprudence, Alberto R. Gonzales
In Search Of Justice: An Examination Of The Appointments Of John G. Roberts And Samuel A. Alito To The U.S. Supreme Court And Their Impact On American Jurisprudence, Alberto R. Gonzales
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
During 2005, President George W. Bush appointed Federal Circuit Court Judges John G. Roberts and Samuel A. Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. These appointments were the culmination of years of examination of the work, character, and temperament of both men commencing during the 2000 presidential transition. Our evaluation included face-to-face interviews; an analysis of judicial opinions, speeches, and writings; and conversation with friends, colleagues, and court experts. Based on this work, a select group of Bush Administration officials developed a set of predictors that formed the basis of our recommendation to President Bush that he elevate Circuit Court Judges …
Reading Blackstone In The Twenty-First Century And The Twenty-First Century Through Blackstone, Jessie Allen
Reading Blackstone In The Twenty-First Century And The Twenty-First Century Through Blackstone, Jessie Allen
Book Chapters
If the Supreme Court mythologizes Blackstone, it is equally true that Blackstone himself was engaged in something of a mythmaking project. Far from a neutral reporter, Blackstone has some stories to tell, in particular the story of the hero law. The problems associated with using the Commentaries as a transparent window on eighteenth-century American legal norms, however, do not make Blackstone’s text irrelevant today. The chapter concludes with my brief reading of the Commentaries as a critical mirror of some twenty-first-century legal and social structures. That analysis draws on a long-term project, in which I am making my way through …
The Philosophy And Jurisprudence Of Chief Justice Roberts, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
The Philosophy And Jurisprudence Of Chief Justice Roberts, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
Utah Law Review
A thicket of commentary has blossomed around the figure of Chief Justice Roberts. The bulk of it, however, has either focused exclusively on his role in the 2011 term or has lumped him in uncritically with the Court’s conservative wing. In response, this Article takes a wider view of his tenure, arguing that Chief Justice Roberts is best understood as an idealist, a true believer in the rule of law, with a special sensitivity toward issues of constitutional structure. In the first Part of the Article, I explore Chief Justice Roberts’s penchant for infusing his opinions with “teaching moments”—a tendency …