Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Supreme Court of the United States Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

5,223 Full-Text Articles 3,267 Authors 745,820 Downloads 139 Institutions

All Articles in Supreme Court of the United States

Faceted Search

5,223 full-text articles. Page 3 of 127.

The Small-Er Screen: Youtube Vlogging And The Unequipped Child Entertainment Labor Laws, Amanda G. Riggio 2021 Seattle University School of Law

The Small-Er Screen: Youtube Vlogging And The Unequipped Child Entertainment Labor Laws, Amanda G. Riggio

Seattle University Law Review

Family vloggers are among the millions of content creators on YouTube. In general, vloggers frequently upload recorded videos of their daily lives. Family vloggers are unique because they focus their content around their familial relationships and the lives of their children. One set of family vloggers, the Ace Family, has recorded their children’s lives from the day they were born and continue to upload videos of each milestone, including “Elle Cries on Her First Rollercoaster Ride” and “Elle and Alaïa Get Caught Doing What!! **Hidden Camera**.” Another vlogging couple, Cole and Savannah LaBrant, post similar content, including videos titled ...


Duress In Immigration Law, Elizabeth A. Keyes 2021 Seattle University School of Law

Duress In Immigration Law, Elizabeth A. Keyes

Seattle University Law Review

The doctrine of duress is common to other bodies of law, but the application of the duress doctrine is both unclear and highly unstable in immigration law. Outside of immigration law, a person who commits a criminal act out of well-placed fear of terrible consequences is different than a person who willingly commits a crime, but American immigration law does not recognize this difference. The lack of clarity leads to certain absurd results and demands reimagining, redefinition, and an unequivocal statement of the significance of duress in ascertaining culpability. While there are inevitably some difficult lines to be drawn in ...


No, The Firing Squad Is Not Better Than Lethal Injection: A Response To Stephanie Moran’S A Modest Proposal, Michael Conklin 2021 Seattle University School of Law

No, The Firing Squad Is Not Better Than Lethal Injection: A Response To Stephanie Moran’S A Modest Proposal, Michael Conklin

Seattle University Law Review

In the article A Modest Proposal: The Federal Government Should Use Firing Squads to Execute Federal Death Row Inmates, Stephanie Moran argues that the firing squad is the only execution method that meets the requirements of the Eighth Amendment. In order to make her case, Moran unjustifiably overstates the negative aspects of lethal injection while understating the negative aspects of firing squads. The entire piece is predicated upon assumptions that are not only unsupported by the evidence but often directly refuted by the evidence. This Essay critically analyzes Moran’s claims regarding the alleged advantages of the firing squad over ...


Social Justice And The Supreme Court: Lessons From The Past, Vicki Lens 2021 Mitchell Hamline School of Law

Social Justice And The Supreme Court: Lessons From The Past, Vicki Lens

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

This article revisits over sixty years of Supreme Court decisions that have affected the poor and racial minorities, using a novel approach that considers the synergistic relationship between different doctrinal areas rather than focusing on one area. Specifically, I appraise the Supreme Court’s doctrinal contributions from 1953 to the present across three foundational elements of social justice on behalf of the poor and people of color: the school integration cases under the Equal Protection Clause, a series of cases under the Fourth Amendment which sanctioned the police tactic of stop-and-frisk, and attempts to secure economic security for the poor ...


The Supreme Court’S Worst Decision In Recent Years – Garcetti V. Ceballos, The Dred Scott Decision For Public Employees, David L. Hudson Jr. 2021 Mitchell Hamline School of Law

The Supreme Court’S Worst Decision In Recent Years – Garcetti V. Ceballos, The Dred Scott Decision For Public Employees, David L. Hudson Jr.

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.


Active Virtues, Michael D. Gilbert, Mauricio A. Guim 2021 University of Virginia

Active Virtues, Michael D. Gilbert, Mauricio A. Guim

Washington University Law Review

Constitutional theory has long been influenced by the idea that the Supreme Court exercises “passive virtues,” avoiding politically divisive cases that threaten its legitimacy. The Article inverts the logic. Supreme Court Justices (and other judges too) do more than avoid divisive cases that could weaken the Court. They seek “unity” cases—meaning cases where law and politics align—that could strengthen the Court. When judges seek unity cases to enhance their legitimacy, they exercise active virtues.

We develop the theory of active virtues and demonstrate its use. Our case studies come from the U.S. Supreme Court and tribunals worldwide ...


The Cyan Decision And Its Impact On State-Level Securities Class Actions, B. John Torabi 2021 Fordham University School of Law

The Cyan Decision And Its Impact On State-Level Securities Class Actions, B. John Torabi

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

The Supreme Court’s decision in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund preserved the Securities Act of 1933’s bar on removing securities class actions brought in state court to federal court. The unanimous ruling cut against a nearly quarter-century long trend of pushing securities class action litigation to the federal courts. Cyan was resolved purely through statutory interpretation, leaving many of the underlying policy questions to be resolved by state courts and in future rulings.

This Note examines the intention of the drafters of the Securities Act of 1933 in designing a disclosure-focused regulatory scheme with a ...


Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret 2021 Penn State Dickinson Law

Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret

Dickinson Law Review

This article explores the characteristics and functions of assertion and considers how the term influences the definition of hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801. Rule 801(a) defines hearsay by limiting it to words and conduct intended as an assertion, but the rule does not define the term assertion. Courts and legal scholars have focused relatively little attention on the nature and definition of assertion. That is unfortunate, because assertion is a robust concept that has been the subject of intense philosophic study over recent decades. Assertion is not a mere cypher standing in for whatever speech or conduct ...


The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum 2021 WIlliam S. Boyd School of Law, UNLV

The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum

Dickinson Law Review

This article enters into the modern debate between “consti- tutional departmentalists”—who contend that the executive and legislative branches share constitutional interpretive authority with the courts—and what are sometimes called “judicial supremacists.” After exploring the relevant history of political ideas, I join the modern minority of voices in the latter camp.

This is an intellectual history of two evolving political ideas—popular sovereignty and the separation of powers—which merged in the making of American judicial power, and I argue we can only understand the structural function of judicial review by bringing these ideas together into an integrated whole ...


Free Speech And Democracy: A Primer For Twenty-First Century Reformers, Toni M. Massaro, Helen Norton 2021 University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law

Free Speech And Democracy: A Primer For Twenty-First Century Reformers, Toni M. Massaro, Helen Norton

Articles

Left unfettered, the twenty-first-century speech environment threatens to undermine critical pieces of the democratic project. Speech operates today in ways unimaginable not only to the First Amendment’s eighteenth-century writers but also to its twentieth-century champions. Key among these changes is that speech is cheaper and more abundant than ever before, and can be exploited — by both government and powerful private actors alike — as a tool for controlling others’ speech and frustrating meaningful public discourse and democratic outcomes.

The Court’s longstanding First Amendment doctrine rests on a model of how speech works that is no longer accurate. This invites ...


Charles Reich, New Dealer, John Q. Barrett 2021 Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center

Charles Reich, New Dealer, John Q. Barrett

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Meta Rules For Ordinary Meaning, Anita S. Krishnakumar 2021 St. John's University School of Law

Meta Rules For Ordinary Meaning, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

“Ordinary meaning” is a notoriously undefined concept in statutory interpretation theory. Courts and scholars sometimes describe ordinary meaning as the meaning that a “reasonable reader” would ascribe to the statutory language at issue, but it remains unclear how judges and lawyers should go about identifying such meaning. Over the past few decades, as textualism has come to dominate statutory interpretation, courts increasingly have employed dictionary definitions as (purportedly) neutral, and sometimes dispositive, evidence of ordinary meaning. And in the past few years especially, some judges and scholars have advocated using corpus linguistics — patterns of usage across various English language ...


Modeling Narrowest Grounds, Maxwell Stearns 2021 University of Maryland School of Law

Modeling Narrowest Grounds, Maxwell Stearns

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s doctrinal statements governing nonmajority opinions demonstrate inconsistencies and confusion belied by the Justices’ behaviors modeling the narrowest grounds doctrine. And yet, lower courts are bound by stated doctrine, beginning with Marks v. United States, not rules of construction inferred from judicial conduct. This Article simplifies the narrowest grounds rule, reconciling doctrinal formulations with observed behaviors, avoiding the implicit command: “Watch what we do, not what we say.”

The two most recent cases considering Marks, Ramos v. Louisiana and Hughes v. United States, obfuscate three central features: (1) when the doctrine does or does not apply; (2 ...


Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review 2021 Seattle University School of Law

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents


Incorporation By Any Other Name? Comparing Congress' Federalization Of Tribal Court Criminal Procedure With The Supreme Court's Regulation Of State Courts, Jordan Gross 2021 Alexander Blewett III School of Law at the University of Montana

Incorporation By Any Other Name? Comparing Congress' Federalization Of Tribal Court Criminal Procedure With The Supreme Court's Regulation Of State Courts, Jordan Gross

Faculty Law Review Articles

This Article examines the different experience of states and tribes with uniform national standards of criminal procedure imposed by the federal government. Part I describes the federal government’s displacement of indigenous justice in service of colonialist political goals, a policy that has contributed to the public safety crisis in Indian country today. Part II explains the constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence the Court developed for states on which Congress has modeled ICRA’s criminal procedure provisions. In TLOA and VAWA 2013, Congress recognized that restoring tribal autonomy over wrongdoing in Indian country must be part of the federal policy response ...


Attribution Time: Cal Tinney’S 1937 Quip, “A Switch In Time’Ll Save Nine”, John Q. Barrett 2021 St. John's University School of Law

Attribution Time: Cal Tinney’S 1937 Quip, “A Switch In Time’Ll Save Nine”, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

In the history of the United States Supreme Court, 1937 was a huge year—perhaps the Court’s most important year ever.

Before 1933, the Supreme Court sometimes held that progressive policies enacted by political branches of government were unconstitutional. Such decisions became much more prevalent during President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first term, from 1933 through 1936. In those years, the Court struck down, often by narrow margins, both federal “New Deal” laws and state law counterparts that sought to combat the devastation of the Great Depression.

Then, in early 1937, President Roosevelt proposed to “pack”—to enlarge—the ...


Sovereign Immunity And Interstate Government Tort, Louise Weinberg 2021 University of Texas, Austin

Sovereign Immunity And Interstate Government Tort, Louise Weinberg

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This paper argues that the Supreme Court made a serious mistake last term, when, in a case of interstate government tort, it tore up useful options that should be available to each state for the rare cases in which they would be of service. In seeking to insulate a state from liability when its employee intrudes on a sister state’s territory and causes injury there, the Court stripped every state of power, in cases of interstate government tort, to try injuries occurring on its own territory to its own residents—an unprecedented disregard of a state’s acknowledged traditional ...


Seamen, Railroad Employees, And Uber Drivers: Applying The Section 1 Exemption In The Federal Arbitration Ace To Rideshare Drivers, Conor Bradley 2021 University of Michigan Law School

Seamen, Railroad Employees, And Uber Drivers: Applying The Section 1 Exemption In The Federal Arbitration Ace To Rideshare Drivers, Conor Bradley

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA or the Act) exempts “seamen, railroad employees, [and] any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce” from arbitration. In 2019, the Supreme Court held in New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira that this provision exempted independent contractors as well as employees. This decision expanded the reach of the section 1 exemption and may affect the relationship between ridesharing companies, such as Uber, and their drivers. Previously, ridesharing companies argued that courts must enforce the arbitration clauses in their employment contracts because their workers were independent contractors and, therefore, section 1 ...


Re-Reading Chevron, Thomas W. Merrill 2021 Columbia Law School

Re-Reading Chevron, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Though increasingly disfavored by the Supreme Court, Chevron remains central to administrative law doctrine. This Article suggests a way for the Court to reformulate the Chevron doctrine without overruling the Chevron decision. Through careful attention to the language of Chevron itself, the Court can honor the decision’s underlying value of harnessing comparative institutional advantage in judicial review, while setting aside a highly selective reading that unduly narrows judicial review. This re-reading would put the Chevron doctrine – and with it, an entire branch of administrative law – on firmer footing.


Presidential Progress On Climate Change: Will The Courts Interfere With What Needs To Be Done To Save Our Planet?, Michael B. Gerrard 2021 Columbia Law School

Presidential Progress On Climate Change: Will The Courts Interfere With What Needs To Be Done To Save Our Planet?, Michael B. Gerrard

Faculty Scholarship

The Biden Administration is undertaking numerous actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition away from fossil fuels as part of the fight against climate change. Many of these actions are likely to be challenged in court. This paper describes the various legal theories that are likely to be used in these challenges, assesses their prospects of success given the current composition of the Supreme Court, and suggests ways to minimize the risks.


Digital Commons powered by bepress