Justice Kennedy’S Controversial Judicial Philosophy, Described By A Former Clerk, 2018 William & Mary Law School
Justice Kennedy’S Controversial Judicial Philosophy, Described By A Former Clerk, Nancy Amoury Combs
No abstract provided.
Book Review: Courtrooms And Classrooms: A Legal History Of College Access, 1860-1960, 2018 Brown University
Book Review: Courtrooms And Classrooms: A Legal History Of College Access, 1860-1960, Mark A. Addison
Journal of College Access
Issues of college access are increasingly met with resolutions within social and economic contexts. Models such as cost of production output, and race and socioeconomic-conscious strategies form the basis of such analyses (Jenkins & Rodriguez, 2013; Henriksen, 1995; Treager Huber, 2010; Schmidt, 2012). We can expect retooling and reinventing of such models with increasing college costs and changes in student demographics.
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared Goldstein's Blog: Masterpiece Cakeshop Ruling: No Constitutional Right To Discriminate (For Now) 06-05-2018, 2018 Roger Williams University School of Law
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared Goldstein's Blog: Masterpiece Cakeshop Ruling: No Constitutional Right To Discriminate (For Now) 06-05-2018, Jared A. Goldstein
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
The Husky Case: Fraud, Bankruptcy, And Veil Piercing, 2018 Brooklyn Law School
The Husky Case: Fraud, Bankruptcy, And Veil Piercing, Harvey Gelb
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
A recent Supreme Court decision, Husky International Electronics, Inc. v. Ritz, explores the meaning of the word “fraud” under a federal bankruptcy statutory section. That section uses the term “actual fraud,” and bears upon the question of whether a particular debt should be denied a discharge. The Court’s approach in defining fraud affords guidance to the question of defining fraud under other statutes. The Husky case also raised a veil piercing issue to be dealt with on remand. That issue involved the application of Texas statutory law precluding veil piercing in cases brought by contract creditors unless they were ...
Things Invisible To See: State Action & Private Property, 2018 Texas A&M University School of Law
Things Invisible To See: State Action & Private Property, Joseph William Singer, Isaac Saidel-Goley
Texas A&M Law Review
This Article revisits the state action doctrine, a judicial invention that shields “private” or “non-governmental” discrimination from constitutional scrutiny. Traditionally, this doctrine has applied to discrimination even in places of public accommodation, like restaurants, hotels, and grocery stores. Born of overt racial discrimination, the doctrine has inflicted substantial injustice throughout its inglorious history, and courts have continuously struggled in vain to coherently apply the doctrine. Yet, the United States Supreme Court has not fully insulated “private” or “horizontal” relations among persons from constitutional scrutiny. The cases in which it has applied constitutional norms to non-governmental actors should be celebrated rather ...
Certiorari, Universality, And A Patent Puzzle, 2018 University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
Certiorari, Universality, And A Patent Puzzle, Tejas N. Narechania
Michigan Law Review
The most important determinant of a case’s chances for Supreme Court review is a circuit split: If two courts of appeals have decided the same issue differently, review is substantially more likely. But practically every appeal in a patent case makes its way to a single court—the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. How, then, does the Supreme Court decide whether to grant certiorari in a patent case?
The petitions for certiorari in the Court’s patent docket suggest an answer: The Supreme Court looks for splits anyway. These splits, however, are of a different sort. Rather ...
Forgotten Cases: Worthen V. Thomas, 2018 Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
Forgotten Cases: Worthen V. Thomas, David F. Forte
Cleveland State Law Review
According to received opinion, the case of the Home Bldg. & Loan Ass’n v. Blaisdell, decided in 1934, laid to rest any force the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution had to limit state legislation that affected existing contracts. But the Supreme Court’s subsequent decisions belies that claim. In fact, a few months later, the Court unanimously decided Worthen v. Thomas, which reaffirmed the vitality of the Contract Clause. Over the next few years, in twenty cases, the Court limited the reach of Blaisdell and confirmed the limiting force of the Contract Clause on state legislation. Only after ...
Hearing The States, 2018 Pepperdine University
Hearing The States, Anthony Johnstone
Pepperdine Law Review
The 2016 Presidential and Senate elections raise the possibility that a conservative, life-tenured Supreme Court will preside for years over a politically dynamic majority. This threatens to weaken the public’s already fragile confidence in the Court. By lowering the political stakes of both national elections and its own decisions, federalism may enable the Court to defuse some of the most explosive controversies it hears. Federalism offers a second-best solution, even if neither conservatives nor liberals can impose a national political agenda. However, principled federalism arguments are tricky. They are structural, more prudential than legal or empirical. Regardless of ideology ...
Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal To Improve The United States Supreme Court, 2018 Pepperdine University
Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal To Improve The United States Supreme Court, Eric J. Segall
Pepperdine Law Review
Over the last twenty-five years, some of the most significant Supreme Court decisions involving issues of national significance like abortion, affirmative action, and voting rights were five-to-four decisions. In February 2016, the death of Justice Antonin Scalia turned the nine-Justice court into an eight-Justice court, comprised of four liberal and four conservative Justices, for the first time in our nation’s history. This article proposes that an evenly divided court consisting of eight Justices is the ideal Supreme Court composition. Although the other two branches of government have evolved over the years, the Supreme Court has undergone virtually no significant ...
What Are The Judiciary’S Politics?, 2018 Pepperdine University
What Are The Judiciary’S Politics?, Michael W. Mcconnell
Pepperdine Law Review
What are the politics of the federal judiciary, to the extent that the federal judiciary has politics? Whose interests do federal judges represent? This Essay puts forward five different kinds of politics that characterize the federal judiciary. First, the federal judiciary represents the educated elite. Second, the federal judiciary represents past political majorities. Third, the federal judiciary is more politically balanced than the legislative or executive branches. Fourth, the federal judiciary is organized by regions, and between those regions there is significant diversity. Fifth, to the extent that the judiciary leans one way or the other, it leans toward the ...
The Right To An Independent Judiciary And The Avoidance Of Constitutional Conflict: The Burger Court’S Flawed Reasoning In Chandler V. Judicial Council Of The Tenth Circuit And Its Unfortunate Legacy, 2018 St. Mary's University
The Right To An Independent Judiciary And The Avoidance Of Constitutional Conflict: The Burger Court’S Flawed Reasoning In Chandler V. Judicial Council Of The Tenth Circuit And Its Unfortunate Legacy, Joshua E. Kastenberg
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
In 1970, the United States Supreme Court issued Chandler v. Judicial Council of the Tenth Circuit in which five Justices determined that the federal courts of appeals possessed an administrative authority to manage the district court judges within an appellate court’s respective circuit. The decision enabled the Tenth Circuit to decide the fitness of a judge to preside over cases without a formal motion from a litigant. Although Congress had enabled the courts of appeals to oversee basic judicial functions (such as temporarily assigning district court judges to overworked districts), Congress did not intend to grant the power to ...
Beyond Headlines & Holdings: Exploring Some Less Obvious Ramifications Of The Supreme Court’S 2017 Free-Speech Rulings, 2018 College of William & Mary Law School
Beyond Headlines & Holdings: Exploring Some Less Obvious Ramifications Of The Supreme Court’S 2017 Free-Speech Rulings, Clay Calvert
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Digging behind the holdings, this Article analyzes less conspicuous, yet highly consequential aspects of the United States Supreme Court’s First Amendment rulings during the opening half of 2017. The four facets of the opinions addressed here—items both within individual cases and cutting across them—hold vast significance for future free-speech battles. Nuances of the justices’ splintering in Matal v. Tam, Packingham v. North Carolina, and Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman are examined, as is the immediate impact of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Packingham dicta regarding online social networks. Furthermore, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s solo concurrence in the threats ...
The History Of U.S. Copyright Law And Disney’S Involvement In Copyright Term Extension, 2018 University of Wyoming
The History Of U.S. Copyright Law And Disney’S Involvement In Copyright Term Extension, Clarissa Anderson
Honors Theses AY 17/18
Copyright term extension is often a contentious topic among copyright owners, corporate lobbyists, and opponents of copyright extension. The history of copyright law spans more than 225 years and has always been an ever-evolving process. The Copyright Act of 1790 was the first statute in the United States to identify definite provisions of copyright law and permitted authors the right to their intellectual property for a duration of 14 years. Today, depending on the type of work, copyright terms can reach up to 120 years. Historically, Disney has been exceedingly protective of their intellectual property and is a prominent supporter ...
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, 2018 University of Pennsylvania Law School
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
Our aim in this essay is to leverage archival research, data and theoretical perspectives presented in our book, Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution against Federal Litigation, as a means to illuminate the prospects for retrenchment in the current political landscape. We follow the scheme of the book by separately considering the prospects for federal litigation retrenchment in three lawmaking sites: Congress, federal court rulemaking under the Rules Enabling Act, and the Supreme Court. Although pertinent data on current retrenchment initiatives are limited, our historical data and comparative institutional perspectives should afford a basis for informed prediction. Of course, little in ...
The Supreme Court Before John Marshall, 2018 University of St. Thomas, Minnesota
The Supreme Court Before John Marshall, Scott Douglas Gerber
University of St. Thomas Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Race, Slavery, And Federal Law, 1789-1804: The Creation Of Proslavery Constitutional Law Before Marbury, 2018 University of St. Thomas, Minnesota
Race, Slavery, And Federal Law, 1789-1804: The Creation Of Proslavery Constitutional Law Before Marbury, Paul Finkelman
University of St. Thomas Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Discretionary Gatekeeping: The Us Supreme Court's Management Of Its Original Jurisdiction Docket Since 1961, 2018 University of Maine School of Law
Discretionary Gatekeeping: The Us Supreme Court's Management Of Its Original Jurisdiction Docket Since 1961, Vincent L. Mckusick
Maine Law Review
There is a special drama when a state sues another state invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States. In the international arena, similar disputes between sovereign states would be settled through diplomatic negotiations or armed conflict, and the stakes in the Supreme Court trial are often as high as in international disputes. The same special drama attends a trial in the Supreme Court with the United States opposing one or more of the fifty States. In drafting Article III of the Constitution the Founders treated the states as quasi-sovereigns and, to match the dignity of ...
We’Ve Come A Long Way (Baby)! Or Have We? Evolving Intellectual Freedom Issues In The Us And Florida, 2018 Florida International University
We’Ve Come A Long Way (Baby)! Or Have We? Evolving Intellectual Freedom Issues In The Us And Florida, L. Bryan Cooper, A.D. Beman-Cavallaro
Works of the FIU Libraries
This paper analyzes a shifting landscape of intellectual freedom (IF) in and outside Florida for children, adolescents, teens and adults. National ideals stand in tension with local and state developments, as new threats are visible in historical, legal, and technological context. Examples include doctrinal shifts, legislative bills, electronic surveillance and recent attempts to censor books, classroom texts, and reading lists.
Privacy rights for minors in Florida are increasingly unstable. New assertions of parental rights are part of a larger conservative animus. Proponents of IF can identify a lessening of ideals and standards that began after doctrinal fruition in the 1960s ...
Both Sides Of The Rock: Justice Gorsuch And The Seminole Rock Deference Doctrine, 2018 Barry University School of Law
Both Sides Of The Rock: Justice Gorsuch And The Seminole Rock Deference Doctrine, Kevin O. Leske
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Despite being early in his tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch has already made his presence known. His October 16, 2017 statement respecting the denial of certiorari in Scenic America, Inc. v. Department of Transportation garnered significant attention within the legal community. Joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Gorsuch questioned whether the Court’s bedrock 2-part test from Chevron, U.S.A. v. NRDC—whereby courts must defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statutory term—should apply in the case.
Justice Gorsuch’s criticism of the Chevron ...
Prisoner's Dilemma—Exhausted Without A Place Of Rest(Itution): Why The Prison Litigation Reform Act's Exhaustion Requirement Needs To Be Amended, Ryan Lefkowitz
The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice
The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) passed in 1996 in an effort to curb litigation from prisoners. The exhaustion requirement of the PLRA requires prisoners to fully exhaust any administrative remedies available to them before filing a lawsuit concerning any aspect of prison life. If a prisoner fails to do so, the lawsuit is subject to dismissal. The exhaustion requirement applies to all types of prisoner lawsuits, from claims filed for general prison conditions to excessive force and civil rights violations. It has been consistently and aggressively applied by the courts, blocking prisoners’ lawsuits from ever going to trial. Attempts ...