Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Attorney General Wirt (1)
- Blackstone’s Commentaries (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- Dictionaries (1)
- Federalist Papers (1)
-
- History (1)
- Interpretation (1)
- Keyes v. School District No. 1 (1)
- NLRB v. Noel Canning (1)
- New originalism (1)
- President (1)
- Race and law (1)
- Race relations (1)
- Racial discrimination (1)
- Recess Appointments Clause (1)
- Roberts Court (1)
- Scalia (Antonin) (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Vacancies (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
When Congress Is Away The President Shall Not Play: Justice Scalia's Concurrence In Nlrb V. Noel Canning, Krista M. Pikus
When Congress Is Away The President Shall Not Play: Justice Scalia's Concurrence In Nlrb V. Noel Canning, Krista M. Pikus
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court unanimously decided NLRB v. Noel Canning, holding that the Recess Appointments Clause authorizes the president “to fill any existing vacancy during any recess . . . of sufficient length.” Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, and Justice Alito. While Justice Scalia “concurred,” his opinion read more like a dissent. Both the majority and the concurring opinions relied heavily on historical evidence in arriving at their respective opinions. This was expected from Justice Scalia given his method of “new originalism,” which focuses on “the original public …
The Keyes To Reclaiming The Racial History Of The Roberts Court, Tom I. Romero, Ii
The Keyes To Reclaiming The Racial History Of The Roberts Court, Tom I. Romero, Ii
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This Article advocates for a fundamental re-understanding about the way that the history of race is understood by the current Supreme Court. Represented by the racial rights opinions of Justice John Roberts that celebrate racial progress, the Supreme Court has equivocated and rendered obsolete the historical experiences of people of color in the United States. This jurisprudence has in turn reified the notion of color-blindness, consigning racial discrimination to a distant and discredited past that has little bearing to how race and inequality is experienced today. The racial history of the Roberts Court is centrally informed by the context and …