Law Commons^™

The Law Professor As Public Intellectual: Felix Frankfurter And The Public And Its Government, R. B. Bernstein

Touro Law Review

Professor R.B. Bernstein was a legal historian with a J.D. from Harvard Law School who taught at the Colin Powell School for Civic and Global Leadership at City College of New York and New York Law School. He presented the paper below on Professor Felix Frankfurter’s The Public and Its Government, published in 1930. A little more than two months after the conference, sadly, Professor Bernstein passed. His brother Steven Bernstein provided the Touro Law Review with the draft of the paper that Professor Bernstein was preparing to submit for publication. We have added footnotes and made only minor revisions. …

The New Dread, Part Ii: The Judicial Overthrow Of The Reasonableness Standard In Police Shooting, Kindaka J. Sanders

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article series argues that the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on excessive force from Graham v. Connor to the present has undermined the objectivity of the reasonableness standard. In its place, the Court has erected a standard that reflects modern conservative political ideology, including race conservatism, law and order, increased police discretion, and the deconstruction of the Warren Court’s expansion of civil rights and civil liberties. Indeed, the Court, dominated by law-and-order conservatives, is one of the greatest triumphs of conservatism. Modern conservatism developed as a backlash against various social movements like the Civil Rights Movement and spontaneous urban rebellions during …

The Roberts Court’S Anti-Democracy Jurisprudence And The Reemergence Of State Authoritarian Enclaves, Reginald Oh

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This Essay argues that the Roberts Court has been a pivotal institutional player in destabilizing constitutional democracy. It has enabled states to freely pursue agendas that are authoritarian in nature. And because authoritarianism is contrary to core principles of the Constitution, the Roberts Court’s constitutional jurisprudence has no basis in the Constitution and must ultimately be rejected.

Instead of taking steps to block authoritarian legislation and promote a fair and open political process, the Court has issued rulings catalyzing and reinforcing the authoritarian impulses of the former Jim Crow states. The Roberts Court has engaged in judicial review reinforcing authoritarianism, …

Justice Brandeis And Civic Duty In A Pluralistic Society, Joel K. Goldstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justice Blackmun And Criminal Justice: A Modest Overview, Stephen L. Wasby

Akron Law Review

Justice Harry A. Blackmun was nominated for a position on the Supreme Court in 1970 by President Richard M. Nixon after the Senate rejected Nixon's nominations of Judges Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell. Blackmun, as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for eleven years, had written opinions that reflected "judicial restraint, an appreciation for the limits of judicial authority and deference to state and legislative prerogatives" as well as conservatism on defendants' rights and civil liberties issues. These strains of thought made him attractive to a president looking for someone supporting the "war …

Book Reviews, Wythe Holt, Kermit L. Hall

Vanderbilt Law Review

The recent death of Earl Warren reminds us, rather sadly, that the great Chief Justice and "his" Court have been subjected to withering and sometimes vicious and unfair criticism from within the academic circle.' The heart of the criticism (most charitably put) has been that the Warren Court hastily, simplistically, and even unnecessarily attempted to elevate egalitarianism into a high,perhaps the highest, social value and standard for constitutional and governmental decision making. We like to think that we believe in a democracy free for all-that is the way we portray ourselves propagandistically to the rest of the world-but the truth …

The Supreme Court And Individual Liberties Since 1952, Paul A. Porter

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Freund: On Understanding The Supreme Court., Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A Review of ON UNDERSTANDING THE SUPREME COURT. By Paul A. Freund.

The Divided Supreme Court, 1944-1945, C. Herman Pritchett

Michigan Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has in recent years been supplying fascinating material for students interested in the interplay of personal and institutional factors in the judicial decision-making process. Contrary to the more restrictive practices of some other legal systems, the traditions of the American judiciary have never insisted that justices sitting en banc should hide the existence of division among themselves behind a facade of pretended unanimity. Justices who dissent from a decision of their brethren have been permitted to say so, and to give their reasons. This practice has had an immeasurably great effect in facilitating the growth …