Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (11)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Freedom of Speech (2)
- Judicial Process (2)
- Appeals (1)
-
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (1)
- Boumediene v. Bush (553 U.S. 723 (2008)) (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Combatants (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- David Hackett Souter (1)
- Dissenting Opinion (1)
- Elena Kagan (1)
- Executive Power (1)
- Federal Civil Rules (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Gay Rights (1)
- Habeas Corpus (1)
- Health Care (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Judgements (1)
- Legislative Histories (1)
- Media Violence (1)
- Military Commissions Act of 2006 (1)
- Pleadings (1)
- Public Opinion (1)
- Retroactive Judicial Decisions (1)
- Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 19 of 19
Full-Text Articles in Law
Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson
Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Justice Souter’s recent retirement from the Court after nearly twenty years presents a unique opportunity to comment on his legacy. No doubt others will eulogize or castigate him for his membership in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey troika, but there is much more to the man and his jurisprudence. Indeed, the danger is that Justice Souter will be pigeonholed into one opinion, an opinion that he wrote early in his Supreme Court career, to the detriment of understanding the complex justice that he was. And what it finds is a justice deeply committed to the fair treatment of the litigants …
Oral Dissenting On The Supreme Court, Christopher W. Schmidt, Carolyn Shapiro
Oral Dissenting On The Supreme Court, Christopher W. Schmidt, Carolyn Shapiro
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
In this Article we offer the first comprehensive evaluation of oral dissenting on the Supreme Court. We examine the practice in both historical and contemporary perspective, take stock of the emerging academic literature on the subject, and suggest a new framework for analysis of oral dissenting. Specifically, we put forth several claims. Contrary to the common assumption of scholarship and media coverage, oral dissents are nothing new. Oral dissenting has a long tradition, and its history provides valuable lessons for understanding the potential and limits of oral dissents today. Furthermore, not all oral dissents are alike. Dissenting Justices may have …
2010-2011 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
2010-2011 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 2: Elena Kagan And The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 2: Elena Kagan And The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 1: Moot Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 1: Moot Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 3: Roberts Court, A Retrospective, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 3: Roberts Court, A Retrospective, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 8: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 8: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 7: Individual Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 7: Individual Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 9: Immigration, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 9: Immigration, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 4: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 4: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 5: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 5: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 6: First Amendment, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 6: First Amendment, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Why The Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not The American People, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Why The Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not The American People, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
Supreme Court Justices care more about the views of academics, journalists, and other elites than they do about public opinion. This is true of nearly all Justices and is especially true of swing Justices, who often cast the critical votes in the Court’s most visible decisions. In this Article, we will explain why we think this is so and, in so doing, challenge both the dominant political science models of judicial behavior and the significant work of Barry Friedman, Jeffrey Rosen, and others who link Supreme Court decision making to public opinion.
Iqbal And The Slide Toward Restrictive Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer
Iqbal And The Slide Toward Restrictive Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Last term, in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court affirmed its commitment to more stringent pleading standards in the ordinary federal civil case. Although the decision is not a watershed, since it merely underscores the substantial changes to pleading doctrine wrought in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, Iqbal is disconcerting for at least two reasons. First, the Court treated Iqbal 's factual allegations in a manner that further erodes the assumption-of-truth rule that has been the cornerstone of modern federal civil pleading practice. The result is an approach to pleading that is governed by a subjective, malleable standard that permits …
Law Versus Ideology: The Supreme Court And The Use Of Legislative History, David S. Law, David Zaring
Law Versus Ideology: The Supreme Court And The Use Of Legislative History, David S. Law, David Zaring
William & Mary Law Review
Much of the social science literature on judicial behavior has focused on the impact of ideology on how judges vote. For the most part, however, legal scholars have been reluctant to embrace empirical scholarship that fails to address the impact of legal constraints and the means by which judges reason their way to particular outcomes. This Article attempts to integrate and address the concerns of both audiences by way of an empirical examination of the Supreme Court’s use of a particular interpretive technique— namely, the use of legislative history to determine the purpose and meaning of a statute. We analyzed …
Controversial Gvrs And The "Degradation" Of The Gvr, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Controversial Gvrs And The "Degradation" Of The Gvr, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Talk Loudly And Carry A Small Stick: The Supreme Court And Enemy Combatants, Neal Devins
Talk Loudly And Carry A Small Stick: The Supreme Court And Enemy Combatants, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Clashing Visions Of A "Living" Constitution: Of Opportunists And Obligationists, William W. Van Alstyne
Clashing Visions Of A "Living" Constitution: Of Opportunists And Obligationists, William W. Van Alstyne
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court, Social Psychology, And Group Formation, Neal Devins, William Federspiel
The Supreme Court, Social Psychology, And Group Formation, Neal Devins, William Federspiel
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.