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

Supreme Court of the United States Commons

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

2426 Full-Text Articles 1474 Authors 487198 Downloads 89 Institutions

All Articles in Supreme Court of the United States

Faceted Search

2426 full-text articles. Page 4 of 61.

Lift The Blackout, Erwin Chemerinsky, Eric J. Segall 2017 University of California Irvine School of Law

Lift The Blackout, Erwin Chemerinsky, Eric J. Segall

Erwin Chemerinsky

No abstract provided.


Washington V. Glucksberg Was Tragically Wrong, Erwin Chemerinsky 2017 Duke University

Washington V. Glucksberg Was Tragically Wrong, Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky

Properly focused, there were two questions before the Supreme Court in Washington v. Glucksberg. First, in light of all of the other non-textual rights protected by the Supreme Court under the "liberty" of the Due Process Clause, is the right to assisted death a fundamental right? Second, if so, is the prohibition of assisted death necessary to achieve a compelling interest? Presented in this way, it is clear that the Court erred in Washington v. Glucksberg. The right of a terminally ill person to end his or her life is an essential aspect of autonomy, comparable to aspects of autonomy ...


Punitive Damages Revisited: A Statistical Analysis Of How Federal Circuit Courts Decide The Constitutionality Of Such Awards, Hironari Momioka 2017 Hokkaido University of Education

Punitive Damages Revisited: A Statistical Analysis Of How Federal Circuit Courts Decide The Constitutionality Of Such Awards, Hironari Momioka

Cleveland State Law Review

Using data from punitive damages decisions of U.S. federal circuit courts from 2004 to 2012, this paper attempts to establish empirically the following: (1) there is no apparent statistical difference between the levels of jury and judge awards; (2) U.S. Supreme Court decisions such as Philip Morris (2007) or Exxon (2008) do not actually or substantially affect the level of punitive damage awards; (3) with regard to the cases involving remittitur, or reduction of awards, the Exxon decision did not radically affect the decreasing ratio of punitive to compensatory damage awards; (4) as the levels of compensatory awards ...


The New Unconstitutionality Of Juvenile Sex Offender Registration: Suspending The Presumption Of Constitutionality For Laws That Burden Juvenile Offenders, Spencer Klein 2017 University of Michigan Law School

The New Unconstitutionality Of Juvenile Sex Offender Registration: Suspending The Presumption Of Constitutionality For Laws That Burden Juvenile Offenders, Spencer Klein

Michigan Law Review

In Smith v. Doe, the Supreme Court held that Alaska’s sex offender registration and notification statute did not constitute punishment and was therefore not susceptible to challenge under the Ex Post Facto Clause. In reaching that conclusion, the Court looked to the seven factors articulated in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez. To evaluate those factors, the Court applied a presumption of constitutionality, conducting the sort of narrow factual inquiry characteristic of rational basis review. Since Smith, courts have disagreed as to whether sex offender laws are punitive when applied to juveniles, and the Supreme Court has not yet addressed the issue ...


Reflection: How Multiracial Lives Matter 50 Years After Loving, Lauren Sudeall Lucas 2017 Georgia State University College of Law

Reflection: How Multiracial Lives Matter 50 Years After Loving, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Faculty Publications By Year

Black Lives Matter. All Lives Matter. These two statements are both true, but connote very different sentiments in our current political reality. To further complicate matters, in this short reflection piece, I query how multiracial lives matter in the context of this heated social and political discussion about race. As a multiracial person committed to racial justice and sympathetic both to those pushing for recognition of multiracial identity and to those who worry such recognition may undermine larger movements, these are questions I have long grappled with both professionally and personally. Of course, multiracial lives matter - but do they constitute ...


Clarence Thomas The Questioner, RonNell Andersen Jones, Aaron L. Nielson 2017 S.J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah

Clarence Thomas The Questioner, Ronnell Andersen Jones, Aaron L. Nielson

Northwestern University Law Review

One of Justice Clarence Thomas’s most remarked upon characteristics is his reluctance to ask questions during oral argument. Observers have criticized him for his silence, with some suggesting that it reflects disrespect for his colleagues and the advocates appearing before the Supreme Court. Others defend his silence, noting, for instance, that historically oral argument played a much less significant role and that Justice Thomas’s written opinions speak for themselves. What has been overlooked in this debate, however, is the fact that Justice Thomas is very talented at asking questions. Indeed, in many ways, he is a model questioner ...


Tribal Supreme Court Project: Ten Year Report, Richard Guest 2017 Seattle University School of Law

Tribal Supreme Court Project: Ten Year Report, Richard Guest

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.


Toward A New Era Of American Indian Scholarship: An Introductory Essay For The American Indian Law Journal, Matthew L.M. Fletcher 2017 Seattle University School of Law

Toward A New Era Of American Indian Scholarship: An Introductory Essay For The American Indian Law Journal, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.


An Empirical Assessment Of Georgia’S Beyond A Reasonable Doubt Standard To Determine Intellectual Disability In Capital Cases, Lauren Sudeall Lucas 2017 Georgia State University College of Law

An Empirical Assessment Of Georgia’S Beyond A Reasonable Doubt Standard To Determine Intellectual Disability In Capital Cases, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Georgia State University Law Review

In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that execution of people with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In doing so, the Court explicitly left to the states the question of which procedures would be used to identify such defendants as exempt from the death penalty. More than a decade before Atkins, Georgia was the first state to bar execution of people with intellectual disability. Yet, of the states that continue to impose the death penalty as a punishment for capital murder, Georgia is the only state that requires capital defendants to ...


Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas 2017 Georgia State University College of Law

Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Commentary on Carol S. Steiker & Jordan M. Steiker, Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment (2016).


An Empirical Assessment Of Georgia's Beyond A Reasonable Doubt Standard To Determine Intellectual Disability In Capital Cases, Lauren Sudeall Lucas 2017 Georgia State University College of Law

An Empirical Assessment Of Georgia's Beyond A Reasonable Doubt Standard To Determine Intellectual Disability In Capital Cases, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Lauren Sudeall Lucas

In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that execution of people with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In doing so, the Court explicitly left to the states the question of which procedures would be used to identify such defendants as exempt from the death penalty. More than a decade before Atkins, Georgia was the first state to bar execution of people with intellectual disability. Yet, of the states that continue to impose the death penalty as a punishment for capital murder, Georgia is the only state that requires capital defendants to ...


Abortion In The Court: The Impact Of Abortion Views On Public Opinion Of The Supreme Court, Robert Heins 2017 Chapman University

Abortion In The Court: The Impact Of Abortion Views On Public Opinion Of The Supreme Court, Robert Heins

Student Research Day Abstracts and Posters

Abortion has long been considered one of the most controversial topics the United States Supreme Court has ruled on. My research examines how one’s opinion on abortion impacts their view of the United States Supreme Court. This analysis will show how much of an impact one policy stance has on the public’s overall view of a much larger institution. To analyze my question, I will utilize American National Election Studies Time Series data from the years 1976, 1988, and 2016. These years will allow me to study the role abortion plays in crafting opinion of the court before ...


Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas 2017 Georgia State University College of Law

Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Faculty Publications By Year

Commentary on Carol S. Steiker & Jordan M. Steiker, Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment (2016).


A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr 2017 Liberty University

A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr

Senior Honors Theses

Since the 9/11 attacks, American legislation and legal policy in regards to classifying and processing captured terrorists has fallen short of being fully effective and lawful. Trial and error by the Bush and Obama administrations has uncovered two key lessons: (1) captured terrorists are not typical prisoners of war and thus their detainment must involve more legal scrutiny than the latter; and (2) captured terrorists are not ordinary criminals and thus the civilian criminal court system, due to constitutional constraints, is not capable of adequately trying every count of terrorism. Other nations, including France and Israel, approach this problem ...


The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan 2017 Houston College of Law

The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan

Cleveland State Law Review

In 2006, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez emphasizing the importance of a defendant’s right to counsel of choice under the Sixth Amendment and holding a denial of this right constitutes structural error, requiring automatic reversal. Following that decision, several federal circuit courts and state appellate courts have questioned how to apply this right to circumstances where the right to choice of counsel and the right to appointed counsel overlap. When a defendant seeks to replace retained counsel for appointed counsel, should the standard governing his motion fall under the right to choice ...


Punishment Without Purpose: The Retributive And Utilitarian Failures Of The Child Pornography Non-Production Sentencing Guidelines, Brittany Lowe 2017 Cleveland-Marshall College of Law

Punishment Without Purpose: The Retributive And Utilitarian Failures Of The Child Pornography Non-Production Sentencing Guidelines, Brittany Lowe

Cleveland State Law Review

Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress established the U.S. Sentencing Commission to formulate an empirical set of federal sentencing Guidelines. With the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Congress intended to further the basic purposes of criminal punishment—deterrence, incapacitation, just punishment, and rehabilitation. Nevertheless, the Guidelines were instantaneously met with disapproval. Asserting that the mandatory Guidelines violated the Constitution, scholars and judges argued that the Commission usurped Congress’s role by prescribing punishments that were essentially binding law. In 2005, the Supreme Court held that the Guidelines were discretionary in United States v. Booker.

While this decision ...


"Major Questions" As Major Opportunities, Riley T. Svikhart 2017 Notre Dame Law School

"Major Questions" As Major Opportunities, Riley T. Svikhart

Notre Dame Law Review

The future of the major question exception is a live question in the wake of King v. Burwell. This Note calls on federal courts to embrace the exception, for where a toothless nondelegation doctrine has failed to curtail the ceaseless growth of executive power experienced over the past century, a more aggressively applied major question exception can succeed in ensuring that policy questions of the deepest “economic and political significance” are left exclusively to the people’s representatives in Congress. In declining to defer to an executive agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute, federal courts must themselves assume “the ...


Disentangling Miranda And Massiah: How To Revive The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel As A Tool For Regulating Confession Law, Eve Brensike Primus 2017 University of Michigan Law School

Disentangling Miranda And Massiah: How To Revive The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel As A Tool For Regulating Confession Law, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

Fifty years after Miranda v. Arizona, many have lamented the ways in which the Burger, Rehnquist, and Roberts Courts have cut back on Miranda's protections. One underappreciated a spect of Miranda's demise is the way it has affected the development of the pretrial Sixth Amendment right to counsel guaranteed by Massiah v. United States. Much of the case law diluting suspects' Fifth Amendment Miranda rights has bled over into the Sixth Amendment right to counsel cases without consideration of whether the animating purposes of the Massiah pretrial right to counsel would support such an importation. This development is ...


The Miranda Case Fifty Years Later, Yale Kamisar 2017 University of Michigan Law School

The Miranda Case Fifty Years Later, Yale Kamisar

Articles

A decade after the Supreme Court decided Miranda v. Arizona, Geoffrey Stone took a close look at the eleven decisions the Court had handed down “concerning the scope and application of Miranda.” As Stone observed, “[i]n ten of these cases, the Court interpreted Miranda so as not to exclude the challenged evidence.” In the eleventh case, the Court excluded the evidence on other grounds. Thus, Stone noted, ten years after the Court decided the case, “the Court ha[d] not held a single item of evidence inadmissible on the authority of Miranda.” Not a single item. To use baseball ...


A Comprehensive Analysis Of Roe V. Wade And Its Legality In Respect To Scientific And Christian Perspectives, Gabriella Morillo 2017 Southeastern University - Lakeland

A Comprehensive Analysis Of Roe V. Wade And Its Legality In Respect To Scientific And Christian Perspectives, Gabriella Morillo

Selected Honors Theses

This thesis is about the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade and how the Court in Roe ruled a child as a “potential to life.” The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments show that there is an expectation of privacy in regards to a woman and her doctor but it is questionable as to whether or not the expectation of privacy can cover the fetus in the womb. The question raised next is whether or not the woman has complete rights to the fetus and whether or not she can decide if the fetus has a right to live or not. Coming ...


Digital Commons powered by bepress