Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
List Of Judges 1985–2017, Notre Dame Law School
List Of Judges 1985–2017, Notre Dame Law School
Annual Moot Court Showcase Argument
The Moot Court program is a student run organization that coordinates intramural and intercollegiate competitions in appellate and international divisions.
Established in 1950, the Moot Court program provides an opportunity for students to develop their appellate advocacy skills. The program is administered by the Moot Court Board (a group of students selected to represent Notre Dame Law School in competitions) and guided by a faculty advisor.
Students are selected to the Moot Court Board after competing in the optional 1L Moot Court Competition and receiving an invitation to join the Board based on their 1L briefs and their performance in …
The Missing Justice In Coleman V. Miller, Barry Cushman
The Missing Justice In Coleman V. Miller, Barry Cushman
Journal Articles
All nine of the sitting justices took part in the 1939 case of Coleman v. Miller, which concerned whether the Kansas legislature had ratified the pending Child Labor Amendment. One of the issues in the case was decided by a vote of 5-4, while another was resolved by a vote of 7-2. With respect to a third issue, however, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes reported that it presented “a question upon which the Court is equally divided and therefore the Court expresses no opinion upon that point.”
Scholars understandably have been puzzled by how a decision in which a full …
Judges As Politicians: The Enduring Tension Of Judicial Elections In The Twenty-First Century, Richard Lorren Jolly
Judges As Politicians: The Enduring Tension Of Judicial Elections In The Twenty-First Century, Richard Lorren Jolly
Notre Dame Law Review Reflection
Elections transform the basis of judicial legitimacy. Whereas a permanently appointed judiciary finds support in its supposed neutrality, the democratic judiciary demands responsiveness. Yet while this is obvious to scholars, the electorate, and most judges—and is in fact confirmed by much statistical data—the Supreme Court and others continue to insist that judicial campaigns can be sculpted to ensure robust democratic debate without compromising the bench’s impartiality. This Essay rejects the notion that the court can be both democratic and disinterested. It reviews the volatile history of judicial elections as well as the modern web of distinctions between protected and proscribable …