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

Supreme Court of the United States Commons

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

4,012 Full-Text Articles 2,469 Authors 745,820 Downloads 126 Institutions

All Articles in Supreme Court of the United States

Faceted Search

4,012 full-text articles. Page 6 of 100.

Accommodating Employees' Sabbaths: Is It The Government's Job?, Neal Devins 2019 William & Mary Law School

Accommodating Employees' Sabbaths: Is It The Government's Job?, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


A New Look At An Old Association: Will Today's Women Be Tomorrow's Jaycees?, Neal Devins 2019 William & Mary Law School

A New Look At An Old Association: Will Today's Women Be Tomorrow's Jaycees?, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


Book Review Of The Second American Revolution, Neal Devins 2019 William & Mary Law School

Book Review Of The Second American Revolution, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


Book Review Of The Supreme Court And Constitutional Democracy, Neal Devins 2019 William & Mary Law School

Book Review Of The Supreme Court And Constitutional Democracy, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


Can Public Housing Tenants, Alleging Civil Rights Violations, Enforce Federal Housing Law?, Douglas Bowman, Neal Devins 2019 William & Mary Law School

Can Public Housing Tenants, Alleging Civil Rights Violations, Enforce Federal Housing Law?, Douglas Bowman, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


The Surprising Role Of Racial Hierarchy In The Civil Rights Jurisprudence Of The First Justice John Marshall Harlan, Davison M. Douglas 2019 William & Mary Law School

The Surprising Role Of Racial Hierarchy In The Civil Rights Jurisprudence Of The First Justice John Marshall Harlan, Davison M. Douglas

Davison M. Douglas

The first Justice John Marshall Harlan’s status as one of the greatest Supreme Court Justices in American history rests largely upon his civil rights jurisprudence. The literature exploring the nuances of Harlan’s civil rights jurisprudence is vast. Far less attention has been paid to the reasons for Harlan’s strong civil rights views. Developing a rich sense of Harlan’s thinking has been difficult because Harlan did not leave behind a large trove of non-judicial writings. There is, however, a remarkable source of Harlan’s thought that has been largely overlooked by scholars: Harlan’s constitutional law lectures ...


The Rhetorical Uses Of Marbury V. Madison: The Emergence Of A "Great Case", Davison M. Douglas 2019 William & Mary Law School

The Rhetorical Uses Of Marbury V. Madison: The Emergence Of A "Great Case", Davison M. Douglas

Davison M. Douglas

Marbury v. Madison is today indisputably one of the "great cases" of American constitutional law because of its association with the principle of judicial review. But for much of its history, Marbury has not been regarded as a seminal decision. Between 1803 and 1887, the Supreme Court never once cited Marbury for the principle of judicial review, and nineteenth century constitutional law treatises were far more likely to cite Marbury for the decision's discussion of writs of mandamus or the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction than for its discussion of judicial review. During the late nineteenth century, however, the ...


Book Review Of Clement Haynsworth, The Senate, And The Supreme Court, Davison M. Douglas 2019 William & Mary Law School

Book Review Of Clement Haynsworth, The Senate, And The Supreme Court, Davison M. Douglas

Davison M. Douglas

No abstract provided.


When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


When Is Finality . . . Final? Rehearing And Resurrection In The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

When Is Finality . . . Final? Rehearing And Resurrection In The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


The Supreme Court’S Controversial Gvrs – And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

The Supreme Court’S Controversial Gvrs – And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

This Article addresses a relatively neglected portion of the Supreme Court's docket: the "GVR"-that is, the Court's procedure for summarily granting certiorari, vacating the decision below without finding error, and remanding the case for further consideration by the lower court. The purpose of the GVR device is to give the lower court the initial opportunity to consider the possible impact of a new development (such as a recently issued Supreme Court decision) and, if necessary, to revise its ruling in light of the changed circumstances. The Court may issue scores or even hundreds of these orders every ...


Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

A number of researchers have recently published new measures of the Supreme Court’s behavior in resolving conflicts in the lower courts. These new measures represent an improvement over prior, cruder approaches, but it turns out that measuring the Court’s resolutions of conflicts is surprisingly difficult. The aim of this methodological comment is to describe those difficulties and to establish several conclusions that follow from them. First, the new measures of the Court’s behavior are certainly imprecise and may reflect biased samples. Second, using the Supreme Court Database, which some studies rely on to assemble a dataset of ...


Controversial Gvrs And The "Degradation" Of The Gvr, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Controversial Gvrs And The "Degradation" Of The Gvr, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


Abbott Labs V. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967), Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Abbott Labs V. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967), Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


Following Lower-Court Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2019 William & Mary Law School

Following Lower-Court Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

This Article examines the role of lower-court precedent in the US Supreme Court’s decisions. The Supreme Court is rarely the first court to consider a legal question, and therefore the Court has the opportunity to be informed by and perhaps even persuaded by the views of the various lower courts that have previously addressed the issue. This Article considers whether the Court should give weight to lower-court precedent as a matter of normative theory and whether the Court in fact does so as a matter of practice. To answer the normative question, this Article analyzes a variety of potential ...


Backdoor Balancing, Elizabeth Earle Beske 2019 Selected Works

Backdoor Balancing, Elizabeth Earle Beske

Elizabeth Earle Beske

The U.S. Supreme Court has employed various mechanisms to blunt the systemic impact of legal change. The Warren Court balanced the interests advanced by new rules against the disruption of their retroactive application and frequently limited new rules to prospective effect. The Rehnquist Court decisively rejected this approach in the mid-1990s and committed itself to full adjudicative retroactivity as to pending cases. This Article argues that, although the Court slammed a door, it subsequently opened a window. The Court has spent the intervening decades devising ostensibly independent and unrelated doctrines to mitigate disruption. Despite the Rehnquist Court’s insistence ...


Section 6: Civil Rights, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School 2019 Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School

Section 6: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Digital Commons powered by bepress