Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (20)
- St. Mary's University (3)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Florida State University College of Law (2)
- The University of Akron (2)
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Mississippi College School of Law (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- Trinity College (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (7)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (6)
- Articles (3)
- Akron Law Review (2)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (2)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Scholarly Publications (2)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (2)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (2)
- Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Brooklyn Law Review (1)
- Life of the Law School (1993- ) (1)
- Maine Law Review (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Mississippi College Law Review (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Publications (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Senior Theses and Projects (1)
- St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics (1)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- University of Miami Law Review (1)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 46 of 46
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Stevens's Ratchet: When The Court Should Decide Not To Decide, Joel A. Flaxman
Stevens's Ratchet: When The Court Should Decide Not To Decide, Joel A. Flaxman
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Hidden underneath the racy death penalty issues in Kansas v. Marsh lurks a seemingly dull procedural issue addressed only in separate opinions by Justices Stevens and Scalia: whether the Court should have heard the case in the first place. As he did in three cases from the Court’s 2005 term, Justice Stevens argued in Marsh that the Court has no legitimate interest in reviewing state court decisions that overprotect federal constitutional rights. Instead, the Supreme Court should exercise its certiorari power to tip the scales against states and in favor of individuals. Granting certiorari in Marsh, Stevens argued, was not …
The High Court Remains As Divided As Ever Over The Death Penalty, George H. Kendall
The High Court Remains As Divided As Ever Over The Death Penalty, George H. Kendall
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
More than three decades ago, in Furman v. Georgia, a sharply divided Supreme Court struck down all existing capital punishment schemes be-cause the results they generated were arbitrary, discriminatory, and unreasoned. No member of that Court remains on the Court today, and the Court has grown increasingly conservative ever since. Nevertheless, impor-tant questions concerning the administration of capital punishment continue to wrought deep divisions within the Court, for instance in determining whether racial bias influences the system, in determining the sufficiency of new evidence of innocence to justify review of a defaulted claim in habeas corpus proceedings, in determining a …
Putting The Guesswork Back Into Capital Sentencing, Sean D. O'Brien
Putting The Guesswork Back Into Capital Sentencing, Sean D. O'Brien
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it “incon-testable” that a death sentence is cruel and unusual if inflicted “by reason of [the defendant’s] race, religion, wealth, social position, or class, or if it is imposed under a procedure that gives room for the play of such prejudices.” Arbitrary and discriminatory patterns in capital sentencing moved the Court to strike down death penalty statutes that required judges or juries to cast thumbs-up or thumbs-down verdicts against offenders found guilty of capi-tal crimes. The issue of innocence was barely a footnote in Furman; the Court’s concerns focused on …
Souter Passant, Scalia Rampant: Combat In The Marsh, Samuel R. Gross
Souter Passant, Scalia Rampant: Combat In The Marsh, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
Kansas law provides that unless a capital sentencing jury concludes that the mitigating factors that apply to the defendant’s crime outweigh the aggravating factors, it must sentence the defendant to death. The Kansas Supreme Court held that this law violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because it “impermissibly mandates the death penalty when the jury finds that the mitigating and aggravating circumstances are in equipoise.” On June 26, in Kansas v. Marsh, the Supreme Court reversed in a 5 to 4 opinion by Justice Thomas.
A Rarefied Kind Of Dread, David I. Bruck
A Rarefied Kind Of Dread, David I. Bruck
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Casting New Light On An Old Subject: Death Penalty Abolitionism For A New Millennium, Wayne A. Logan
Casting New Light On An Old Subject: Death Penalty Abolitionism For A New Millennium, Wayne A. Logan
Michigan Law Review
For opponents of capital punishment, these would appear promising times. Not since 1972, when the Supreme Court invalidated the death penalty as then administered, has there been such palpable concern over its use, reflected in the lowest levels of public opinion support evidenced in some time. This concern is mirrored in the American Bar Association's recently recommended moratorium on use of the death penalty, the consideration of or actual imposition of moratoria in several states, and even increasing doubts voiced by high-profile political conservatives. An array of troubling empirical realities has accompanied this shift: persistent evidence of racial bias in …
Still Unfair, Still Arbitrary - But Do We Care?, Samuel R. Gross
Still Unfair, Still Arbitrary - But Do We Care?, Samuel R. Gross
Other Publications
Welcome. It is a pleasure to see everybody at this bright and cheery hour of the morning. My assignment is to try to give an overview of the status of the death penalty in America at the beginning of the twenty-first century. I will try to put that in the context of how the death penalty was viewed thirty years ago, or more, and maybe that will tell us something about how the death penalty will be viewed thirty or forty years from now.
The Limits Of Legal Language: Decisionmaking In Capital Cases, Jordan M. Steiker
The Limits Of Legal Language: Decisionmaking In Capital Cases, Jordan M. Steiker
Michigan Law Review
To make the case for the proposed changes, I will first describe briefly in Parts I and II the structure of pre- and post-Furman capital decisiorurtaking and the weaknesses of those approaches. I then will set forth in Part III the specific rationales for each proposed reform.
The scheme I propose raises a significant constitutional question. Can the death penalty be retained as a punishment if we abandon the pretense of providing meaningful guidance through detailed sentencing instructions? Would the reestablishment of relatively unstructured penalty phase deliberations similar to, but also importantly different from, those characteristic of pre-Furman …
Capital Punishment's Future, Welsh S. White
Capital Punishment's Future, Welsh S. White
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Capital Punishment in America by Raymond Paternoster
Challenging The Death Penalty Under State Constitutions, James R. Acker, Elizabeth R. Walsh
Challenging The Death Penalty Under State Constitutions, James R. Acker, Elizabeth R. Walsh
Vanderbilt Law Review
Death penalty litigation that reaches the Supreme Court now causes at least as much consternation as hope among opponents of capital punishment. Simply not losing rights that once were considered secure can be tantamount to victory in capital cases decided by the Court,and few defendants and opponents of capital punishment expect much more. It was not always so. Hopes were once high that the Supreme Court, and the federal courts generally, would effectively bring an end to capital punishment in America.
That prospect is now remote, at best. Death row populations are sky rocketing and executions are on the rise. …
The Capital Punishment Conundrum, Eric Schnapper
The Capital Punishment Conundrum, Eric Schnapper
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Life in the Balance: Procedural Safeguards in Capital Cases by Welsh S. White
The Death Penalty In America, Michigan Law Review
The Death Penalty In America, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Death Penalty in America (Third Edition) by Hugo Adam Bedau
Berger's Defense Of The Death Penalty: How Not To Read The Constitution, Hugo Adam Bedau
Berger's Defense Of The Death Penalty: How Not To Read The Constitution, Hugo Adam Bedau
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Death Penalties: The Supreme Court's Obstacle Course by Raoul Berger
Florida's Legislative Response To Furman: An Exercise In Futility?, Charles W. Ehrhardt, Harold Levinson
Florida's Legislative Response To Furman: An Exercise In Futility?, Charles W. Ehrhardt, Harold Levinson
Scholarly Publications
No abstract provided.
The Reincarnation Of The Death Penalty: Is It Possible?, Yale Kamisar
The Reincarnation Of The Death Penalty: Is It Possible?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Fifty years ago Clarence Darrow, probably the greatest criminal defense lawyer in American history and a leading opponent of capital punishment, observed: The question of capital punishment has been the subject of endless discussion and will probably never be settled so long as men believe in punishment. Some states have abolished and then reinstated it; some have enjoyed capital punishment for long periods of time and finally prohibited the use of it. The reasons why it cannot be settled are plain. There is first of all no agreement as to the objects of punishment. Next there is no way to …
The Future Of Capital Punishment In Florida: Analysis And Recommendations, Charles W. Ehrhardt, Phillip A. Hubbart, Harold Levinson, William Mckinley Smiley, Thomas A. Wills
The Future Of Capital Punishment In Florida: Analysis And Recommendations, Charles W. Ehrhardt, Phillip A. Hubbart, Harold Levinson, William Mckinley Smiley, Thomas A. Wills
Scholarly Publications
The Supreme Court's decision abolishing the death penalty, at least as it existed in most jurisdictions, hardly represents the final resolution of the controversy over capital punishment. Given substantial public sentiment which apparently favors capital punishment in some form-voiced, for example, in the results of the recent referendum in California-various legislative bodies will face the question of whether capital punishment can and should be legislatively reinstated. In December 1972 the State of Florida became the first jurisdiction to pass judgment on this question. The legislature enacted a bill allowing imposition of the death penalty in certain circumstances. The two articles …