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 7 of 127.

As She Lies In State, A Tribute To Justice Ginsburg, Katherine Mims Crocker 2020 William & Mary Law School

As She Lies In State, A Tribute To Justice Ginsburg, Katherine Mims Crocker

Popular Media

No abstract provided.


Law School News: Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Rwu Law 09/23/2020, Michael M. Bowden 2020 Roger Williams University School of Law

Law School News: Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Rwu Law 09/23/2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.


U.S. Forest Service V. Cowpasture River Preservation Ass'n., Taylor A. Simpson 2020 Alexander Blewett III School of Law at the University of Montana

U.S. Forest Service V. Cowpasture River Preservation Ass'n., Taylor A. Simpson

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the United States Forest Service and Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, a company who planned to construct a natural gas pipeline under a section of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail within the George Washington National Forest. The legal battle sought to clarify whether the United States Forest Service had the authority to grant the pipeline builder a right-of-way across the Appalachian Trail. The Court ruled that the National Park Service holds an easement for administering the Appalachian Trail, but the land over which the trail crosses remains under the jurisdiction of the ...


2020-2021 Supreme Court Preview: Biographies Of 2020 Supreme Court Preview Panelists, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

2020-2021 Supreme Court Preview: Biographies Of 2020 Supreme Court Preview Panelists, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


2020-2021 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule Of Events, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

2020-2021 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule Of Events, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


What Is The Future Of The Supreme Court? Potential Reforms, Their Likelihood, And Their Implications, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

What Is The Future Of The Supreme Court? Potential Reforms, Their Likelihood, And Their Implications, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

On Saturday, September 12 at 4:15pm, the Supreme Court Preview will feature a panel on "What is the Future of the Supreme Court? Potential Reforms, Their Likelihood, and Their Implications." Democrats recently unveiled “structural court reforms” as part of their platform. These potential reforms include, among others, adding seats to the Supreme Court, making changes to the confirmation process, and shortening the Justices’ terms of office. This panel will discuss which reforms seem most likely to be adopted and what concerns are motivating them. Twenty-five W&M students will also bring their questions to the panel about the future ...


Transparency And The Shadow Docket, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

Transparency And The Shadow Docket, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

On Saturday, September 12 at 2:00pm, the Supreme Court Preview will feature a panel on "Transparency and the Shadow Docket." “The shadow docket” is a phrase used to describe the significant volume of orders and summary decisions that the Supreme Court issues without full briefing and oral argument. This panel will discuss what is new and what is not about the shadow docket. The panelists will speculate on the ways in which the Court will use these orders going forward, and will discuss the upsides and downsides of doing so.


2020-2021 Supreme Court Preview: Notebook Cover Page, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins, Rebecca Green, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

2020-2021 Supreme Court Preview: Notebook Cover Page, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins, Rebecca Green, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

Our traditional notebook will not be available this year due to the virtual setting. However, we have compiled this virtual notebook to provide all participating in the Supreme Court Preview an opportunity to learn more about the upcoming docket and the issues facing the Court. We hope you enjoy the wealth of information available throughout this virtual notebook.


The Supreme Court And The 2020 Election: What Challenges Are Likely And What Will Be The Supreme Court's Role In Deciding Them?, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

The Supreme Court And The 2020 Election: What Challenges Are Likely And What Will Be The Supreme Court's Role In Deciding Them?, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

On Friday, September 11 at 5:30pm, the Supreme Court Preview will feature a panel on "The Supreme Court and the 2020 Election What Challenges are likely and what will be the Supreme Court's Role in Deciding them?" As we approach a historic election in November 2020, many anticipate that election challenges will wind up in federal court. This panel will discuss trends in COVID-related election cases at the Court so far, anticipate which challenges are likely going forward, and will speculate what the Supreme Court’s role will be in deciding them. What has changed at the Court ...


Moot Court, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

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

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Granted Cases, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

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

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Who Is The Real John Roberts? Predicting The Surprises Of The Fall Term, Institute of Bill of Rights Law at The College of William & Mary Law School 2020 William & Mary Law School

Who Is The Real John Roberts? Predicting The Surprises Of The Fall Term, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

On Saturday, September 12 at 3:00pm, the Supreme Court Preview will feature a panel on "Who is the Real John Roberts? Predicting the Surprises of the Fall Term." Chief Justice Roberts cast several votes in high-profile cases last Term that many found to be surprising, and it led to a debate over whether the Chief Justice should be described as a moderate or not. This panel will anticipate which cases in the 2020-2021 Term will provide an opportunity for the Chief Justice to cast the deciding vote, and will address whether the Chief Justice’s voting pattern in 2020 ...


Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review 2020 Seattle University School of Law

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents


Caught By The Cat’S Paw, Sandra F. Sperino 2020 Brigham Young University Law School

Caught By The Cat’S Paw, Sandra F. Sperino

BYU Law Review

Federal employment discrimination law is enamored with court-created doctrines with catchy names. A fairly recent addition to the canon is the concept of the “cat’s paw,” formally recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in Staub v. Proctor Hospital. With its name … drawn from a fable, the concept of cat’s paw has taken ground quickly, discussed in hundreds of cases.

The Supreme Court recognized the cat’s paw theory in a case where a hospital fired a worker. The person who made the ultimate decision did not have impermissible bias. However, her decision was influenced by information from ...


Visions Of The Republic Symposium: School Funding Under The Neutrality Principle: Notes On A Post-Espinoza Future, Aaron Saiger 2020 Fordham University School of Law

Visions Of The Republic Symposium: School Funding Under The Neutrality Principle: Notes On A Post-Espinoza Future, Aaron Saiger

Fordham Law Review Online

Based on current conditions, and for a variety of reasons, the best guess—and it is only a guess—is that common schooling might be forced to give way before a rigorously read First Amendment duty of the state to avoid preferring irreligion over religion. This need not signal the end of the Progressive educational vision, however. It will be possible for those committed to the values inherent in common schooling to regroup, reconsidering some of their positions in order to advance their core commitments.


Constitutionalizing Financial Stability, Patricia A. McCoy 2020 Boston College Law School

Constitutionalizing Financial Stability, Patricia A. Mccoy

Boston College Law School Faculty Papers

In the last Supreme Court term, the Court ruled in Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that Article II of the U.S. Constitution and separation of powers prohibit Congress from shielding the Bureau’s director from termination except for cause. Seila Law has natural implications for the CFPB’s independence (although the magnitude of that effect is unclear). More troubling, Seila Law could open up the financial system to destabilization by paving the path for a full-scale assault on the traditional independence of federal financial regulators and presidential manipulation of the economy.

Seila Law erodes independent agency ...


Invasion Of The Content-Neutrality Rule, William D. Araiza 2020 Brigham Young University Law School

Invasion Of The Content-Neutrality Rule, William D. Araiza

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.


Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand 2020 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand

Arkansas Law Review

In a 5-4 opinion, the United States Supreme Court once again denied a Bivens action. This case involved a tragic crossborder shooting by a border patrol agent standing on United States soil, who shot and killed a young boy standing on Mexican soil. Petitioners, the boy’s parents, sought relief under Biven2, arguing the agent’s action violated the Constitution. However, the Court determined the cross-border shooting was a new Bivens context, which required an analysis of whether any special factors “counseled hesitation” for the cause of action to be extended. The Court concluded Bivens was inappropriate because several factors ...


Stare Decisis And The Identity-Over-Time Problem: A Comment On The Majority's Wrongness In Kisor V. Wilkie, Christian Talley 2020 Southern Methodist University

Stare Decisis And The Identity-Over-Time Problem: A Comment On The Majority's Wrongness In Kisor V. Wilkie, Christian Talley

SMU Law Review Forum

In Kisor v. Wilkie, the Supreme Court recently confronted whether to overrule the doctrine under which courts defer to agencies’ interpretations of their own ambiguous regulations—so-called Auer or Seminole Rock deference. In its prior reexaminations of Seminole Rock, the Court had progressively restricted the doctrine’s scope, leading observers to wonder whether the Justices would scrap it for good. This question of administrative law ignited a corollary debate about stare decisis. Writing for the majority, Justice Kagan argued that stare decisis mandated the preservation of Seminole Rock. Yet as she appealed to stare decisis, her opinion further restricted the ...


Consent, Coercion, And Employment Law, Samuel R. Bagenstos 2020 University of Michigan Law School

Consent, Coercion, And Employment Law, Samuel R. Bagenstos

Articles

The Roberts Court has recently handed several high-profile wins in labor and employment law cases to anti-labor and pro-employer forces. This paper argues that those decisions replicate crucial moves made by some infamous Lochner-era cases — and that those same moves continue to underlie key elements of labor and employment doctrine more generally. In particular, these decisions rest on a contestable understanding of free worker choice. This paper begins by examining the key recent Roberts Court decisions and demonstrates that they appear to invoke at least two distinct and conflicting understandings of employee and employer choice. It then turns to the ...


Digital Commons powered by bepress