Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 18 of 18
Full-Text Articles in Law
Statutory Interpretation Doctrine On The Modern Supreme Court And Four Doctrinal Approaches To Judicial Decision-Making , R. Randall Kelso
Statutory Interpretation Doctrine On The Modern Supreme Court And Four Doctrinal Approaches To Judicial Decision-Making , R. Randall Kelso
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Step Aside, Mr. Senator: A Request For Members Of The Senate Judiciary Committee To Give Up Their Mics, Paul E. Vaglicia
Step Aside, Mr. Senator: A Request For Members Of The Senate Judiciary Committee To Give Up Their Mics, Paul E. Vaglicia
Indiana Law Journal
In 1995, a law professor at the University of Chicago Law School dubbed the Supreme Court confirmation hearings “vapid and hollow” and added that they, as implemented, “serve little educative function, except perhaps to reinforce lessons of cynicism that citizens often glean from government.” Ironically, this same law professor, Elena Kagan, later endured the confirmation hearings as a nominee and currently sits as the 112th Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. While she may be one of the few to ever reach a seat on the High Court, she is not alone in her assessment of the Supreme Court’s lackluster …
Determining Notoriety In Supreme Court Decisions , G. Edward White
Determining Notoriety In Supreme Court Decisions , G. Edward White
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Explaining Korematsu: A Response To Dean Chemerinsky , Robert J. Pushaw Jr.
Explaining Korematsu: A Response To Dean Chemerinsky , Robert J. Pushaw Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Redeeming Erie: A Response To Suzanna Sherry , Donald Earl Childress Iii
Redeeming Erie: A Response To Suzanna Sherry , Donald Earl Childress Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Wrong, Out Of Step, And Pernicious: Erie As The Worst Decision Of All Time, Suzanna Sherry
Wrong, Out Of Step, And Pernicious: Erie As The Worst Decision Of All Time, Suzanna Sherry
Pepperdine Law Review
This essay was written for “Supreme Mistakes: Exploring the Most Maligned Decisions in Supreme Court History.” A symposium on the worst Supreme Court decision of all time risks becoming an exercise best described by Claude Rains’s memorable line in Casablanca: “Round up the usual suspects.” Two things saved this symposium from that fate. First, each of the usual suspects was appointed defense counsel, which made things more interesting. Second, a new face found its way into the line-up: Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. My goal in this essay is to explain why Erie is in fact guiltier than all of the …
A Reluctant Apology For Plessy: A Response To Akhil Amar, Barry P. Mcdonald
A Reluctant Apology For Plessy: A Response To Akhil Amar, Barry P. Mcdonald
Pepperdine Law Review
A response to the article "Plessy v. Ferguson and the Anti-Canon," by Akhil Amar, published in the November 2011 issue of the "Pepperdine Law Review," is presented. Topics include an examination of Justice Henry Billings Brown's decision in the case, the constitutionality of segregating U.S. citizens by race, and the impact of public opinion on U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
Plessy V. Ferguson And The Anti-Canon, Akhil Reed Amar
Plessy V. Ferguson And The Anti-Canon, Akhil Reed Amar
Pepperdine Law Review
The article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson, which dealt with the constitutionality of racial segregation in the U.S. Topics include the application of precedent in controversial U.S. Supreme Court cases, when the U.S. Constitution can overrule a court decision, and dissenting judicial opinions.
Coming To Terms With Dred Scott: A Response To Daniel A. Farber, Paul Finkelman
Coming To Terms With Dred Scott: A Response To Daniel A. Farber, Paul Finkelman
Pepperdine Law Review
When thinking about Dred Scott, the issue is not how do we “rehabilitate” the opinion. The goal of scholarship here is to understand the opinion, place it in the context of its own time, and explain its enduring significance. After that, we may praise or damn it, and rehabilitate it or condemn it. No one today likes the Dred Scott opinion or the result. But, this article argues that Professor Daniel A. Farber is so incensed by the opinion that he vastly overstates its historical significance including incorrectly blaming Chief Justice Taney for causing the Civil War. This article rejects …
Anti-Canonical Considerations, Edward J. Larson
Anti-Canonical Considerations, Edward J. Larson
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Building The Federal Judiciary (Literally And Legally): The Monuments Of Chief Justices Taft, Warren And Rehnquist, Judith Resnik
Building The Federal Judiciary (Literally And Legally): The Monuments Of Chief Justices Taft, Warren And Rehnquist, Judith Resnik
Indiana Law Journal
The “federal courts” took on their now familiar contours over the course of the twentieth century. Three chief justices—William Howard Taft, Earl Warren, and William Rehnquist—played pivotal roles in shaping the institutional, jurisprudential, and physical premises. Taft is well known for promoting a building to house the U.S. Supreme Court and for launching the administrative infrastructure that came to govern the federal courts. Earl Warren’s name has become the shorthand for a jurisprudential shift from state toward federal authority; the Warren Court offered an expansive understanding of the role federal courts could play in enabling access for a host of …
Swing Votes On The Current Supreme Court: The Joint Opinion In Casey And Its Progeny, R. Randall Kelso, Charles D. Kelso
Swing Votes On The Current Supreme Court: The Joint Opinion In Casey And Its Progeny, R. Randall Kelso, Charles D. Kelso
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Roberts Court & Executive Power, Jeffrey Rosen
The Roberts Court & Executive Power, Jeffrey Rosen
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Alito/O'Connor Switch, Joan Biskupic
Introduction To Symposium: An Enigmatic Court? Examining The Roberts Court As It Begins Year Three, Douglas W. Kmiec, Kenneth W. Starr
Introduction To Symposium: An Enigmatic Court? Examining The Roberts Court As It Begins Year Three, Douglas W. Kmiec, Kenneth W. Starr
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Second Annual William French Smith Memorial Lecture: A Conversation With Justice Clarence Thomas, Clarence Thomas, Kenneth W. Starr, Shelley Saxer, Douglas W. Kmiec, Charles R. Eskridge
The Second Annual William French Smith Memorial Lecture: A Conversation With Justice Clarence Thomas, Clarence Thomas, Kenneth W. Starr, Shelley Saxer, Douglas W. Kmiec, Charles R. Eskridge
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Thirty-First Annual Pepperdine University School Of Law Dinner: Keynote Address, John G. Roberts Jr
Thirty-First Annual Pepperdine University School Of Law Dinner: Keynote Address, John G. Roberts Jr
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introduction , J. Matt Williams