Legal History Commons^™

Collaborative Divorce: What Louis Brandeis Might Say About The Promise And Problems?, Susan Saab Fortney

Faculty Scholarship

If you ask legal ethics scholars what they remember about Louis D. Brandeis's judicial confirmation hearings, most would point to the manner in which he responded to questions about his representation of persons with perceived conflicts of interest. Louis Brandeis responded to challenges by stating that he was "counsel for the situation. Some use this comment when examining problems associated with a single lawyer representing multiple clients in the same transaction. Others believe that Brandeis may have been referring to a type of intermediary role in which lawyers attempt to adjust the rights and interests of multiple clients with potentially …

Mother. Orator. Woman Suffrage Leader: The Feminist Legacy Of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Paula A. Monopoli

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Strange Life Of Stanley V. Illinois: A Case Study In Parent Representation And Law Reform, Joshua Gupta-Kagan

Faculty Scholarship

This Article helps describe the growth of parent representation through an analysis of Stanley v. Illinois — the foundational Supreme Court case that established parental fitness as the constitutional lynchpin of any child protection case. The Article begins with Stanley’s trial court litigation, which illustrates the importance of vigorous parental representation and an effort by the court to prevent Stanley from obtaining an attorney. It proceeds to analyze how family courts applied it (or not) in the years following the Supreme Court’s decision and what factors have led to a recent resurgence of Stanley’s fitness focus.

Despite Stanley …

Stanley V. Illinois'S Untold Story, Joshua Gupta-Kagan

Faculty Scholarship

Stanley v. Illinois is one of the Supreme Court’s more curious landmark cases. The holding is well known: the Due Process Clause both prohibits states from removing children from the care of unwed fathers simply because they are not married and requires states to provide all parents with a hearing on their fitness. By recognizing strong due process protections for parents’ rights, Stanley reaffirmed Lochner-era cases that had been in doubt and formed the foundation of modern constitutional family law. But Peter Stanley never raised due process arguments, so it has long been unclear how the Court reached this …