Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Indian law (2)
- Separation of powers (2)
- Tribal courts (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- 1751-1836 – Trials (1)
-
- 1761 or 2-1836 – Trials (1)
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Book review (1)
- 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)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Court fixing (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
- Doctrine of precedent (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Due process (1)
- England (1)
- Etc (1)
- Etc; Madison (1)
- Fairness (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- History (1)
- Hurtado v. California (1)
- Indian Reserved Water Rights (1)
- James (1)
- John Shurts (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Can Process Theory Constrain Courts?, Michael C. Dorf, Samuel Issacharoff
Can Process Theory Constrain Courts?, Michael C. Dorf, Samuel Issacharoff
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
The political process theory introduced by the Carolene Products footnote and developed through subsequent scholarship has shaped much of the modern constitutional landscape. Process theory posits that courts may justifiably intervene in the political arena when institutional obstacles impede corrective action by political actors themselves. Judged by this standard, the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore was a failure, because the majority could not explain why its interference was necessary. More broadly, Bush v. Gore points to a central deficiency in process theory: it relies upon the Justices to guard against their own overreaching, but does not …
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.
Book #23, Roger J. Miner '56
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.
Court Fixing, Tracey E. George
Court Fixing, Tracey E. George
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This Article critically examines the existing social science evidence on the relative importance of various individual factors on judicial behavior and adds to that evidence by considering the influence of prior academic experience on judges. Researchers have not focused much attention on the importance of a judge's background as a full-time law professor and legal scholar, although more than thirteen percent of courts of appeals appointees were former law professors. Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan both viewed the federal judiciary (particularly the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals) as integral to their policy agendas, and both further believed that …
The Unsettling Of The West: How Indians Got The Best Water Rights, David H. Getches
The Unsettling Of The West: How Indians Got The Best Water Rights, David H. Getches
Publications
No abstract provided.
Undoing Indian Law One Case At A Time: Judicial Minimalism And Tribal Sovereignty, Sarah Krakoff
Undoing Indian Law One Case At A Time: Judicial Minimalism And Tribal Sovereignty, Sarah Krakoff
Publications
No abstract provided.
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …
State Accountability For Violations Of Intellectual Property Rights: How To "Fix" Florida Prepaid (And How Not To), Mitchell N. Berman
State Accountability For Violations Of Intellectual Property Rights: How To "Fix" Florida Prepaid (And How Not To), Mitchell N. Berman
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch
The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In 1801, when William Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering Secretary of State James Madison to deliver his commission as justice of the peace, he initiated one of the most important cases in the Court's history. But why did Marbury choose the Supreme Court? Was there a lower federal court that could have granted the writ at the time? The short answer is "yes." Rather than making an unsuccessful attempt to invoke the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court, I have learned that he could have brought his suit in the then …