Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Summary Judgment Revolution That Wasn't, Jonathan Remy Nash, D. Daniel Sokol
The Summary Judgment Revolution That Wasn't, Jonathan Remy Nash, D. Daniel Sokol
William & Mary Law Review
The U.S. Supreme Court decided a trilogy of cases on summary judgment in 1986. Questions remain as to how much effect these cases have had on judicial decision-making in terms of wins and losses for plaintiffs. Shifts in wins, losses, and what cases get to decisions on the merits impact access to justice. We assemble novel datasets to examine this question empirically in three areas of law that are more likely to respond to shifts in the standard for summary judgment: antitrust, securities regulation, and civil rights. We find that the Supreme Court’s decisions had a statistically significant effect in …
Retconning Heller: Five Takes On New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. V. Bruen, Brannon P. Denning, Glenn H. Reynolds
Retconning Heller: Five Takes On New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. V. Bruen, Brannon P. Denning, Glenn H. Reynolds
William & Mary Law Review
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen was the first significant Second Amendment case that the Supreme Court had heard in nearly fifteen years since its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. This Article offers some preliminary observations about the opinion itself, as well as its likely effects, some of which are starting to manifest.
Our first take concerns the question of opinion assignment. Why did Chief Justice Roberts—whose support for the Second Amendment has been suspect—assign the opinion to Justice Thomas?
Takes Two and Three concern Justice Thomas’s substitution of text, history, and tradition …
Justice Alito's Laundry List: Highlights From Appendix C Of Bostock And A Roadmap For Lgbtq+ Legal Advocates, Peter Quinn
Justice Alito's Laundry List: Highlights From Appendix C Of Bostock And A Roadmap For Lgbtq+ Legal Advocates, Peter Quinn
William & Mary Law Review
After a brief background on Bostock [v. Clayton County] in Part I, the bulk of this Note seeks to examine Justice Alito’s Bostock dissent and its potential future usefulness for LGBTQ+ advocates. Part II will analyze Justice Alito’s dissent and Appendix C, arguing that his concerns about Bostock’s consequences across other federal statutes fall into three primary categories of usefulness. The remaining Parts will survey these categories, including the “small potatoes” in Part III, the “blockbusters” in Part IV, and the “under-the-radar” areas in Part V. Part V takes particular notice of potential applications of Bostock’s …