Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

The Roberts Court After A Seismic Term, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Moot Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

2022-2023 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule Of Events, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Granted Cases, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

2022-2023 Supreme Court Preview: Digital Notebook (Cover Page), Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

2022-2023 Supreme Court Preview: Panelist Biographies, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

“Let's Hear It From The Girls”: Abortion Activism At Cal Poly, 1970-1980, Michelle L. Mueller

The Forum: Journal of History

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Conference Of Chief Justices In Support Of Neither Party, Moore V. Harper, No. 21-1271 (U.S. Sept. 6, 2022), Evan Caminker, Carter G. Phillips, Virginia A. Seitz, Kathleen M. Mueller

Appellate Briefs

Founded in 1949, amicus curiae Conference of Chief Justices (the “Conference”) is comprised of the Chief Justices or Chief Judges of the courts of last resort in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. For over 70 years, the Conference has been a leading national voice on important issues concerning the administration of justice in state courts, the operation of state courts and judicial systems, and the role of state courts in our federal system.

The Conference files briefs …

Holmes V. Walton And Its Enduring Lessons For Originalism, Justin W. Aimonetti

Marquette Law Review

Originalism is nothing new. And the New Jersey Supreme Court’s 1780 decision in Holmes v. Walton shows it. In that case, the New Jersey Supreme Court disallowed a state law as repugnant to the state constitution because the law permitted a jury of only six to render a judgment. To reach that result, the court looked to the fixed, original meaning of the jury trial guarantee embedded in the state constitution, and it then constrained its interpretive latitude in conformity with that fixed meaning. Holmes thus cuts against the common misconception that originalism as an interpretive methodology is a modern …

From Four Horsemen To The Rule Of Six: The Deconstruction Of Judicial Deference, Keith W. Rizzardi

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

In its tumultuous 2022 term, the Supreme Court rebalanced the separation of powers, again. A tradition of self-restraint has evolved through case law and statutes when the judiciary reviews the actions of the other branches of government. The judiciary often accepts congressional judgments as to whether laws are necessary and proper and defers to executive agency interpretations of those congressional acts. The historical notion of judicial deference, however, earned criticism due to concerns about the potential unchecked decision-making power of unelected executive agency bureaucrats. The emerging alternative system might be worse.

History offers parallels. During the New Deal, a core …

Funding Faith: The Paycheck Protection Program's Establishment Clause Violation, Brenna Jean O'Connor

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In the early months of 2020, COVID-19 had a swift and profound impact on public health, the economy, state and local governments, and businesses across the United States. In response, on March 27, 2020, the United States Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) to protect the American people from the worsening public health crisis and mitigate the resulting economic downturn. Additionally, within the CARES Act, Congress established the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”), which expanded the Small Business Administration’s (“SBA”) authority to guarantee forgivable loans to eligible small businesses. Among other prerequisites, the PPP …

Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

During President Trump’s term in office, the Senate confirmed nearly 250 of his federal judicial nominees, including 3 to the Supreme Court of the United States. That number amounts to nearly a third of the federal judiciary’s roughly 800 active members. By and large, the judges nominated by President Trump purport to apply some form of originalist constitutional interpretation or construction, though the subject of originalism featured perhaps most prominently at the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett, whom President Trump nominated in October of 2020 to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Whatever one thinks of the vast literature …

Does Houchins V. Kqed, Inc. Matter?, Matthew L. Schafer

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Million-Dollar Diversity Docket, Steven Gensler, Roger Michalski

BYU Law Review

Congress has always imposed an amount in controversy requirement for general diversity jurisdiction. Congress initially set the jurisdictional amount at $500 in 1789 and has raised it six times, most recently in 1996 to its current $75,000 threshold. That requirement has been described as ensuring that the federal courts not become bogged down by “petty” or “insubstantial” state-law cases. Given that it has been twenty-five years since the last increase, we are probably overdue for another one. But to what amount? For what purpose? And with what effects on the size and composition of the diversity docket? What would happen …

Upaya Pemerintah Terhadap Perlindungan Ekspresi Budaya Tradisional Batik Motif Parang Sebagai Warisan Budaya Dunia, Raden Zulfikar Supinarko Putra

"Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI

Abstract

Batik is not just a design on a piece of cloth, more than that, batik is a soul that blends in the procession of Indonesian society. Since the baby has been carried with a batik cloth, weddings wear batik cloth until when they die they will be covered with batik cloth too usually. This fact become a consideration for UNESCO to establish Indonesian Batik as a Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity in the Fourth Session of The Intergovernmental Committee. This research uses a normative legal research method that is descriptive and analytical using a statutory …

Perbedaan Akad Wakalah Bil Ujrah Dan Akad Qard Terhadap Permasalahan Akad Pembelian Barang Dalam Kehidupan Sehari-Hari, Zendy Sellyfio Ardiana

"Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI

Abstract

The wakalah bil ujrah and qard contract are contracts that often cause difficulties in implementing the purchase of goods in everyday life, both in safekeeping for purchasing goods and for buying and selling in general. Where if it is wrong in its application, it can cause income in a sale and purchase to be haraam due to an error in understanding the contract used and not describing benefit as the core of maqashid al-sharia which has an important role in determining Islamic law. The purpose of this paper is to find out how the solution to the application of …

Tinjauan Yuridis Dalam Penyelesaian Pelanggaran Ham Berat Melalui Komisi Kebenaran Dan Rekonsiliasi Di Afrika Selatan Dan Indonesia, Tshana Erfandi

"Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI

Abstract

Several countries are currently developing a solution to the problem by establishing a particular commission. The commission works outside the courts, parliament and executive. In Indonesia, In Indonesia. The People's Consultative Assembly set a stipulation regarding the establishment of the National Center for Truth and Reconciliation: (NCTR) in 2000. This stipulation has the intent and purpose for national unity to identify existing problems, determine the conditions that must be made in order to achieve national reconciliation and establish policy direction as a guide to carry out the consolidation of unity of a nation. Whereas in South Africa, the National …

The Suspension Clause After Department Of Homeland Security V. Thuraissigiam, Jonathan Hafetz

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In June 2020, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court of the United States rejected a constitutional challenge to Congress’s decision to eliminate habeas corpus jurisdiction over legal challenges to expedited removal orders by noncitizens in federal detention.

In Thuraissigiam, U.S. border patrol stopped the petitioner, Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam, a Sri Lankan national of Tamil ethnicity, shortly after he crossed the U.S.-Mexico border without inspection or an entry document. The petitioner asserted that he was fleeing persecution in his home country and sought asylum in the United States. The asylum officer concluded that Thuraissigiam had …

A New Supreme Court Case Threatens Another Body Blow To Our Democracy, Katherine A. Shaw, Leah Litman, Carolyn Shapiro

Online Publications

When the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, the justices in the majority insisted they were merely returning the issue of abortion to the democratic process. But a case the court has announced it will hear in its October term could make that democratic process a lot less democratic.

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. …