The Supreme Court’S Controversial Gvrs – And An Alternative,
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 year
This Article …
Subject Matter Jurisdiction,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
Precedent,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note,
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 cases resolving conflicts, …
Controversial Gvrs And The "Degradation" Of The Gvr,
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,
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),
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,
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 reasons …
2019-2020 Supreme Court Preview: Contents,
2019
William & Mary Law School
2019-2020 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 2: What To Expect From The Roberts Court,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 2: What To Expect From The Roberts Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
2019-2020 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule And Panel Members,
2019
William & Mary Law School
2019-2020 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule And Panel Members, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 1: Moot Court: Bostock V. Clayton County, Georgia; Altitude Express, Inc. V. Zarda,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 1: Moot Court: Bostock V. Clayton County, Georgia; Altitude Express, Inc. V. Zarda, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 3: Criminal Law,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 3: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 5: Business Law,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 5: Business Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 4: Immigration Law,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 4: Immigration Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 6: Civil Rights,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 6: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 7: Constitutional Law,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Section 7: Constitutional Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court Stays Asylum Injunction: Signal On The Merits Or Procedural Snag?,
2019
Roger Williams University School of Law
Supreme Court Stays Asylum Injunction: Signal On The Merits Or Procedural Snag?, Peter Margulies
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Collaborative Divorce: What Louis Brandeis Might Say About The Promise And Problems?,
2019
Texas A&M University School of Law
Collaborative Divorce: What Louis Brandeis Might Say About The Promise And Problems?, Susan Saab Fortney
Susan S. Fortney
No abstract provided.
Heller, Mcdonald, And Murder: Testing The More Guns = More Murder Thesis,
2019
College of William & Mary
Heller, Mcdonald, And Murder: Testing The More Guns = More Murder Thesis, Don B. Kates, Carlisle Moody
Carlisle Moody
No abstract provided.
