Probing For Holes In The 100-Year-Old Baseball Exemption: A New Post-Alston Challenge, 2022 University of Cincinnati College of Law
Probing For Holes In The 100-Year-Old Baseball Exemption: A New Post-Alston Challenge, Sam C. Ehrlich
University of Cincinnati Law Review
As professional baseball’s unique exemption to antitrust law celebrates its one-hundredth year of existence, it faces a new attack in Nostalgia Partners v. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, a claim by a group of minor league owners shut out of MLB’s recent restructuring of its minor league affiliate system. While the baseball exemption has weathered dozens of similar challenges over the past century, the Nostalgia Partners plaintiffs claim that circumstances on the Supreme Court have changed enough that the justices would be willing to overturn or narrow the exemption in their favor. This claim rests with the ...
A Tipping Point In Ohio: The Primacy Model As A Path To A Consistent Application Of Judicial Federalism, 2022 University of Cincinnati College of Law
A Tipping Point In Ohio: The Primacy Model As A Path To A Consistent Application Of Judicial Federalism, The Honorable Pierre Bergeron
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
Nysrpa V. Bruen And The Future Of The Sensitive Places Doctrine: Rejecting The Ahistorical Government Security Approach, 2022 Everytown for Gun Safety
Nysrpa V. Bruen And The Future Of The Sensitive Places Doctrine: Rejecting The Ahistorical Government Security Approach, Carina Bentata Gryting, Mark Anthony Frassetto
Boston College Law Review
On November 3, 2021, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, a Second Amendment case challenging New York’s concealed carry licensing system. The justices’ questions focused not only on who may obtain a license to carry a firearm in public, but also where those with a license may or may not bring their weapons. These questions acknowledged that the Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller provided a carveout for firearms restrictions in “sensitive places,” providing “schools and government buildings” as just two examples. In the fourteen years ...
Is The End Of Roe V. Wade Near? Leaked Scotus Brief Says Yes, 2022 Boston University School of Public Health; Boston University School of Law
Is The End Of Roe V. Wade Near? Leaked Scotus Brief Says Yes, Nicole Huberfeld, Linda C. Mcclain
Shorter Faculty Works
Protesters on both sides of the abortion debate descended on the US Supreme Court Monday night and into Tuesday after a leaked secret draft of a US Supreme Court opinion indicated that a majority of justices support overturning Roe v. Wade, after almost 50 years of legalized abortion rights in America. If finalized, possibly as soon as this summer, the bombshell could trigger a cultural tsunami across American life, forcing some women to travel to another state for an abortion and putting the divisive issue at the heart of the fall midterm elections.
Ideological Preferences Of Supreme Court Justices: The Shift Throughout Tenure, 2022 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
Ideological Preferences Of Supreme Court Justices: The Shift Throughout Tenure, Amelia Ver Woert
Political Science Undergraduate Honors Theses
For this thesis, I will analyze the tenure of five Supreme Court justices across the decades, ranging from the year 1940 up to the present year of 2022. The analysis will examine the variation between the justices' decisions at the beginning of their term compared to the decisions near the end of their term. The purpose of this study is to properly distinguish whether Supreme Court justices who have served on the bench for more than a decade are impacted by ideological drift and preference shifts throughout their career. The importance of this analysis is to determine the impact of ...
Calling Balls And Strikes? Chief Justice Roberts In October Term 2019, 2022 Candidate for Juris Doctor, Notre Dame Law School, 2022
Calling Balls And Strikes? Chief Justice Roberts In October Term 2019, Meghan Dalton
Notre Dame Law Review
Part I of this Note will outline the scope of the assignment power, focusing on the strategic considerations a Chief Justice can make in assigning opinions. Part II will analyze Roberts’s voting and assignment patterns in October Term 2019, specifically applying the earlier discussions to his assignment choices in three key cases decided this term. Part III will focus on Chief Justice Roberts’s jurisprudential values and explore how these concerns might have informed his decision making in October Term 2019. Finally, this Note concludes by asking to what extent Roberts’s recent assignment choices are consistent with his ...
Heirs Of An Administration: Unlawful Executive Actions, 2022 Catholic University of America (Student)
Heirs Of An Administration: Unlawful Executive Actions, Jerome Perez
Catholic University Law Review
The Supreme Court of the United States in DHS v. Regents on June 18, 2020, decided to stall the Trump administration from rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy that the Obama administration created contrary to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)––even though in 2016 the Supreme Court affirmed a preliminary injunction on the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) policy, which mirrors DACA. This blunder offhandedly sacrifices the Supreme Court’s reputation as nonpartisan by enlisting itself as the future arbiter of administrative issues with self-evident resolutions and deciding contrary to those resolutions to endorse a ...
Elucidation Strategies: A Case Study Of The U.S Supreme Court, 2022 Belmont University
Elucidation Strategies: A Case Study Of The U.S Supreme Court, Gordon Carroll
Belmont University Research Symposium (BURS)
The research encompassed a study on the consistency in judicial interpretations and factors that influenced U.S. Supreme Court decisions. To do this, the study explored literature and theoretical perspectives relating to judicial interpretations and decisions. The target population entailed officers in the Office of the Solicitor General for their experience in Court rulings. Interviews were conducted among ten respondents, with data collected, coded, and analyzed. The study results were then presented, discussed, and conclusions derived from them. Generally, the study found serious inconsistencies in interpretations not only between justices but also in almost similar cases. Decisions by justices were ...
The (Unnoticed) Revitalization Of The Doctrine Of Equivalents, 2022 St. John's University School of Law
The (Unnoticed) Revitalization Of The Doctrine Of Equivalents, Daryl Lim
St. John's Law Review
Over the past century, few patent issues have been considered so often by the Supreme Court of the United States as the doctrine of equivalents (“DOE”). This judge-made rule deals with a question that lies at the heart of patent policy—what is the best way to define property rights in an invention? The doctrine gives patentees an opportunity to ensnare an accused device that does not literally infringe a patent claim if the accused device is substantially similar to each claim limitation. Patentees enjoy this advantage, but it comes at a cost to the public, who must face ...
Rewriting Whren V. United States, 2022 Boston University School of Law
Rewriting Whren V. United States, Jonathan P. Feingold, Devon Carbado
In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Whren v. United States—a unanimous opinion in which the Court effectively constitutionalized racial profiling. Despite its enduring consequences, Whren remains good law today. This Article rewrites the opinion. We do so, in part, to demonstrate how one might incorporate racial justice concerns into Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, a body of law that has long elided and marginalized the racialized dimensions of policing. A separate aim is to reveal the “false necessity” of the Whren outcome. The fact that Whren was unanimous, and that even progressive Justices signed on, might lead one to ...
“She’S Earned This”: Angela Onwuachi-Willig Rejoices In Historic Confirmation, 2022 Boston University School of Law
“She’S Earned This”: Angela Onwuachi-Willig Rejoices In Historic Confirmation, Angela Onwuachi-Willig
Shorter Faculty Works
Angela Onwuachi-Willig, the dean of Boston University’s School of Law—the first Black woman to be dean of a top-20 law school—is rejoicing. The first Black woman has been confirmed to the US Supreme Court.
Onwuachi-Willig has had Ketanji Brown Jackson’s back from the moment President Biden announced he would nominate the federal judge to the nation’s highest court.
Bu Celebrates Ketanji Brown Jackson’S Rise To Us Supreme Court, 2022 Boston University School of Public Health; Boston University School of Law
Bu Celebrates Ketanji Brown Jackson’S Rise To Us Supreme Court, Nicole Huberfeld
Shorter Faculty Works
The operative word about Ketanji Brown Jackson is “first.” Once she is sworn in to the US Supreme Court, after being confirmed by the Senate Thursday 53-47 (three Republicans joined Democrats in supporting her), she will be the first Black woman on the high court in its 233 years. And she will be the first former public defender to join the court. Brown Jackson—the daughter of a lawyer and a school principal and currently a federal appellate judge in Washington, D.C.—won Senate confirmation after a bruising hearing last week where Republican senators tried to label her as ...
Nature Deserves Rights, Too: The Case For A ‘Rights Of Nature’ Constitutional Amendment, 2022 St. John's University School of Law
Nature Deserves Rights, Too: The Case For A ‘Rights Of Nature’ Constitutional Amendment, Michelle Mandler
Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development
Picture this: Every day, millions of Americans enjoy the great outdoors. People of all ages dive into cool, blue oceans and babbling rivers across the United States. Others visit local and National parks, hiking steep mountains and running through green fields sprinkled with tall trees and sweet-smelling flowers in every color. They pick and snack on apples and berries along their paths, breathing in the crisp outdoor air. Birds soar overhead. Insects buzz and flutter through the breeze. Sunshine gleams down upon the earth.
Now, picture this: The surrounding environment is actually deteriorating— silently suffering—and harming these people ...
Locked Out: Sora, Sara And The Need For Defense Counsel Advisals And Judicial Plea Colloquies On Sex Offense-Related Housing Consequences, 2022 St. John's University School of Law
Locked Out: Sora, Sara And The Need For Defense Counsel Advisals And Judicial Plea Colloquies On Sex Offense-Related Housing Consequences, Matthew Cleaver
Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development
On May 20, 2014, Miguel Gonzalez became eligible for conditional release from prison, having served over two years of his two-and-a-half-year sentence for statutory rape. Instead of releasing Gonzalez, the New York Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) confined Gonzalez for an additional seven and a half months after his initial release date and over four months after his maximum sentence. On February 4, 2015, DOCCS finally released Gonzalez from New York’s Woodbourne Correctional Facility. The sole reason for Gonzalez’s additional confinement was his failure to secure housing that complied with the residency restrictions placed on ...
State Rejection Of Federal Law, 2022 Associate Professor and Wall Family Fellow, University of Missouri School of Law and Kinder Institute on Constitutional Democracy
State Rejection Of Federal Law, Thomas B. Bennett
Notre Dame Law Review
Sometimes the United States Supreme Court speaks, and states do not follow. For example, in 2003, the Arizona Supreme Court agreed to “reject” a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, because no “sound reasons justif[ied] following” it. Similarly, in 2006, Michigan voters approved a ballot initiative that, according to the legislature that drafted it, sought “at the very least to ‘freeze’ the state’s . . . law to prevent” state courts from following a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court. Surprising though this language may be, there is nothing nefarious about these cases. Cooper v. Aaron this is not ...
Judicial Consensus: Why The Supreme Court Should Decide Its Cases Unanimously, 2022 University of Connecticut
Judicial Consensus: Why The Supreme Court Should Decide Its Cases Unanimously, David Orentlicher
Connecticut Law Review
Like Congress and other deliberative bodies, the Supreme Court decides its cases by majority vote. If at least five of the nine Justices come to an agreement, their view prevails. But why is that the case? Majority voting for the Court is not spelled out in the Constitution, a federal statute, or Supreme Court rules.
Nor it is obvious that the Court should decide by a majority vote. When the public votes on a ballot measure, it typically makes sense to follow the majority. The general will of the electorate ought to govern. But judicial decisions are not supposed to ...
Outside Tinker’S Reach: An Examination Of Mahanoy Area School District V. B. L. And Its Implications, 2022 Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
Outside Tinker’S Reach: An Examination Of Mahanoy Area School District V. B. L. And Its Implications, Michelle Hunt
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
In the 1969 landmark case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court reassured students that they do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” Ever since then, the exact scope of students’ free speech rights has been unclear, but the high court has used Tinker’s substantial disruption test to clarify its scope in successive legal challenges. In 2017, B. L., a Mahanoy Area School District student, was suspended from her cheerleading team after using vulgar language off-campus that made its way back to her coaches. She challenged ...
Fair Construction To Living Constitution: Analyzing Constitutional Interpretation Throughout United States History, Joshua Lloyd
Senior Honors Theses
The proper method of constitutional interpretation has been debated throughout the history of the Supreme Court. This debate has been defined by the tension between the originalist and living constitution jurisprudences. Each has been dominant at one point in United States history. A fair construction jurisprudence was almost universally utilized by the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution according to its original meaning until Plessy v. Ferguson. Then, due to an alliance between evangelicals and progressive scholars, a broader, more lenient living constitution jurisprudence developed which allowed justices to interpret the Constitution in light of changing social norms. Finally, following ...
Look Who's Talking: Conscience, Complicity, And Compelled Speech, 2022 Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Look Who's Talking: Conscience, Complicity, And Compelled Speech, B. Jessie Hill
Indiana Law Journal
Compelled speech claims, which arise under the Free Speech Clause, and complicity claims, which usually arise under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), are structurally similar. In each case, an individual claims that the government is forcing her to participate in a particular act that violates her religious or moral beliefs and imperatives, sending a false and undesired message to others and causing a form of spiritual or dignitary harm. It is therefore no surprise that compelled speech claims are often raised together with complicity claims in cases where religious individuals challenge the application of generally applicable laws to themselves ...
Aggregate Stare Decisis, 2022 University of Connecticut School of Law
Aggregate Stare Decisis, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
Indiana Law Journal
The fate of stare decisis hangs in the wind. Different factions of the Supreme Court are now engaged in open debate—echoing decades of scholarship—about the doctrine’s role in our constitutional system. Broadly speaking, two camps have emerged. The first embraces the orthodox view that stare decisis should reflect “neutral principles” that run orthogonal to a case’s merits; otherwise, it will be incapable of keeping the law stable over time. The second argues that insulating stare decisis from the underlying merits has always been a conceptual mistake. Instead, the doctrine should focus more explicitly on the merits ...