Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Colonial judiciary (1)
- Colonial source of law (1)
- Confederacy; state's rights; Arkansas Supreme Court; Arkansas Supreme Court postbellum; David W. Walker; John J. Clendenin; Freeman W. Compton; William W. Wilshire; Thomas M. Bowen; John M. McClure; Lafayette Gregg; William M. Harrison; Elhanan J. Searle; John M. Bennett; Marshall L. Stephenson; legal effect of secession; enforceability of contracts payable in Confederate money; effect of Civil War on Statute of Limitations (1)
- Doctrine of precedent (1)
- Separation of powers (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Judging In The Days Of The Early Republic: A Critique Of Judge Richard Arnold's Use Of History In Anastasoff V. United States, R. Ben Brown
Judging In The Days Of The Early Republic: A Critique Of Judge Richard Arnold's Use Of History In Anastasoff V. United States, R. Ben Brown
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Judge Arnold writes in his opinion that courts have the power to interpret or find the law but not create it. He argues that this practice was well established during colonial times and that it was adopted at the nation’s creation. The source of law during the formation of the United States is not as clear as Judge Arnold claims. Courts applied their roles differently in each jurisdiction. The complex history of the appropriate role of the judiciary contradicts Judge Arnold’s claim.
The Arkansas Supreme Court And The Aftermath Of The Civil War, L. Scott Stafford
The Arkansas Supreme Court And The Aftermath Of The Civil War, L. Scott Stafford
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.