Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Climate Change In The Supreme Court, Lisa Heinzerling
Climate Change In The Supreme Court, Lisa Heinzerling
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court confronted the issue of climate change for the first time. The Court held that the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate greenhouse gases and that the agency may not decline to exercise this authority based either on factors not present in the statute or inconclusive gestures toward uncertainty in the science of climate change. I had the privilege of serving as the lead author of the winning briefs in this case. This Article provides an insider's perspective on the choices that went into bringing and …
Age And Tenure Of The Justices And Productivity Of The U.S. Supreme Court: Are Term Limits Necessary?, Joshua C. Teitelbaum
Age And Tenure Of The Justices And Productivity Of The U.S. Supreme Court: Are Term Limits Necessary?, Joshua C. Teitelbaum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Article examines the relationship between the productivity of the U.S. Supreme Court and the age and tenure of the Supreme Court Justices. The motivation for this Article is the Supreme Court Renewal Act of 2005 (SCRA) and other recent proposals to impose term limits for Supreme Court Justices. The authors of the SCRA and others suggest that term limits are necessary because, inter alia, increased longevity and terms of service of the Justices have resulted in a decline in the productivity of the Court as measured by the number of cases accepted for review and the number of opinions …
Pragmatism And Judgment: A Comment On Lund, Mark V. Tushnet
Pragmatism And Judgment: A Comment On Lund, Mark V. Tushnet
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Nelson Lund's article is entitled The Rehnquist Court's Pragmatic Approach to Civil Rights.' I raise three questions about his analysis, two of which take off from the phrasing of his title. First, calling the present Court the Rehnquist Court is obviously easy, and I do it myself in the subtitle of my forthcoming book. Professor Lund has of course taken his charge from the conveners of this Symposium, and I do not mean to criticize him for doing so. Still, it may be worth pointing out that convening a symposium that encourages people to think in terms of "the Rehnquist …