Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- 4th amendment (1)
- Abortion (1)
- Amicus curiae (1)
- Anti-abortion (1)
- Balancing test (1)
-
- Communist (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Distribution of powers (1)
- Doctrine (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Henry clay (1)
- John marshall (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judical Assignment (1)
- Judicial Power (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Law (1)
- Laws (1)
- O’connor (1)
- Political Questions (1)
- Religious expression (1)
- Religious freedom (1)
- Religious practices (1)
- Restoration act (1)
- Scalia (1)
- State (1)
- State interest test (1)
- Stop and frisk (1)
- Supreme court (1)
- Terry v. ohio (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of Communists And Anti-Abortion Protestors: The Consequences Of Falling Into The Theoretical Abyss, Christina E. Wells
Of Communists And Anti-Abortion Protestors: The Consequences Of Falling Into The Theoretical Abyss, Christina E. Wells
Faculty Publications
Part I of this article briefly reviews the legal and social context of Dennis and Yates. Parts II and III similarly review Madsen and Schenck in order to show potential parallels to the earlier communist decisions. Part IV further examines both Madsen and Schenck, demonstrating that, from a doctrinal standpoint, they are far removed from the earlier communist cases. Finally, Part V explains how the Court in Madsen and Schenck actually contributed to misconceptions or manipulation of its opinions. Specifically, Part V examines the Madsen and Schenck Courts' approaches to three of the more difficult doctrinal issues facing them--prior restraint, …
Judicial Exclusivity And Political Instability, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher
Judicial Exclusivity And Political Instability, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
A Matter Of Power: Structural Federalism And Separation Doctrine In The Present, Frances Howell Rudko
A Matter Of Power: Structural Federalism And Separation Doctrine In The Present, Frances Howell Rudko
Faculty Publications
Public reaction to the 1823 Supreme Court decision in Green v. Biddle prompted John Marshall’s letter to Henry Clay, who had argued the case as amicus curiae for the defendant. The letter is significant because Marshall, who had been a legislator himself, candidly expresses not only his personal dissatisfaction with the congressional assault on the 1823 decision but also the constitutional basis for his opinion. The significance of Marshall’s extrajudicial opinion becomes more apparent when it is considered in the aftermath of the recent tug-of-war between Congress and the Court which culminated in the decision in City of Boerne v. …
State Of Ohio V. Richard D. Chilton And State Of Ohio V. John W. Terry: The Suppression Hearing And Trial Transcripts, John Q. Barrett
State Of Ohio V. Richard D. Chilton And State Of Ohio V. John W. Terry: The Suppression Hearing And Trial Transcripts, John Q. Barrett
Faculty Publications
This appendix to Deciding the Stop and Frisk Cases: A Look Inside the Supreme Court’s Conference, 72 St. John’s L. Rev. 749 (1998), includes Biographical Information on the Participants in the Case; and transcripts of the complete pretrial and trial proceedings in the 1964 criminal prosecutions of Richard Chilton and John Terry, arranged by Prof. Barrett to create the organization reflected in the Table of Contents at the beginning of the appendix. Footnotes were added to provide citations and, in a few instances, to clarify the text. Bracketed material was added to correct obvious slips of the tongue or the …
The Sign Of The Four": Judicial Assignment And The Rule Of Law, Jonathan L. Entin
The Sign Of The Four": Judicial Assignment And The Rule Of Law, Jonathan L. Entin
Faculty Publications
This article will examine the issues of judicial assignment. Then the article will return to the Cameron situation in an effort to put that controversy into broader perspective. Finally, the article will consider state procedures that, for practical purposes, authorize litigants to make peremptory challenges to judges in certain circumstances. Those procedures have implications for the discussion of random assignments and for the way we think about Judge Cameron's charges.