Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Jurisprudence (2)
- United States. Supreme Court (2)
- Criminal Justice System (1)
- Decision Making in Prosecution (1)
- Diversion Programs (1)
-
- Election districts (1)
- Election law (1)
- First Amendment protections (United States Constitution) (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Gerrymandering (1)
- Iancu v. Brunletti (1)
- Judicial Reform (1)
- Justice (1)
- Legal precedent (1)
- Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck (1)
- Nieves v. Barlett (1)
- Partisanship (1)
- Plea Bargaining (1)
- Prosecutors (1)
- Race discrimination & politics (1)
- Reasoning (1)
- Stare decisis (1)
- Supreme Court justices (U.S.) (1)
- United States. Congress-- Election districts (1)
- Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) (United States) (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Janus-Faced Judging: How The Supreme Court Is Radically Weakening Stare Decisis, Michael Gentithes
Janus-Faced Judging: How The Supreme Court Is Radically Weakening Stare Decisis, Michael Gentithes
William & Mary Law Review
Drastic changes in Supreme Court doctrine require citizens to reorder their affairs rapidly, undermining their trust in the judiciary. Stare decisis has traditionally limited the pace of such change on the Court. It is a bulwark against wholesale jurisprudential reversals. But, in recent years, the stare decisis doctrine has come under threat.
With little public or scholarly notice, the Supreme Court has radically weakened stare decisis in two ways. First, the Court has reversed its long-standing view that a precedent, regardless of the quality of its reasoning, should stand unless there is some special, practical justification to overrule it. Recent …
Theories Of Prosecution, Jeffrey Bellin
Theories Of Prosecution, Jeffrey Bellin
Faculty Publications
For decades, legal commentators sounded the alarm about the tremendous power wielded by prosecutors. Scholars went so far as to identify uncurbed prosecutorial discretion as the primary source of the criminal justice system’s many flaws. Over the past two years, however, the conversation shifted. With the emergence of a new wave of “progressive prosecutors,” scholars increasingly hail broad prosecutorial discretion as a promising mechanism for criminal justice reform.
The abrupt shift from decrying to embracing prosecutorial power highlights a curious void at the center of criminal justice thought. There is no widely accepted normative theory of the prosecutorial role. As …
Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert
Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First Amendment …
Challenging Congress's Single-Member District Mandate For U.S. House Elections On Political Association Grounds, Austin Plier
Challenging Congress's Single-Member District Mandate For U.S. House Elections On Political Association Grounds, Austin Plier
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.