Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Charles Evan Hughes (2)
- Court-Packing Plan (2)
- Franklin D. Roosevelt (2)
- Homer Cummings (2)
- Joseph Robinson (2)
-
- Supreme Court (2)
- Burton Wheeler (1)
- Common Law (1)
- Comparative Statutory Interpretation (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Federal court (1)
- Fisher (1)
- General law (1)
- George Sutherland (1)
- Hatton Sumners (1)
- Henry Fountain Ashurst (1)
- Intersystemic Interpretation (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Nasser (1)
- Owen J. Roberts (1)
- Shelby County (1)
- State Courts (1)
- Statutory Interpretation (1)
- Strict Scrutiny Deference (1)
- Supreme court (1)
- Vance (1)
- William Borah (1)
- Willis Van Devanter (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Statutes In Common Law Courts, Jeffrey Pojanowski
Statutes In Common Law Courts, Jeffrey Pojanowski
Journal Articles
The Supreme Court teaches that federal courts, unlike their counterparts in the states, are not general common law courts. Nevertheless, a perennial point of contention among federal law scholars is whether and how a court’s common law powers affect its treatment of statutes. Textualists point to federal courts’ lack of common law powers to reject purposivist statutory interpretation. Critics of textualism challenge this characterization of federal courts’ powers, leveraging a more robust notion of the judicial power to support purposivist or dynamic interpretation. This disagreement has become more important in recent years with the emergence of a refreshing movement in …
Court-Packing And Compromise, Barry Cushman
Court-Packing And Compromise, Barry Cushman
Journal Articles
President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1937 Court-packing bill would have permitted him to appoint six additional justices to the Supreme Court, thereby expanding its membership to fifteen immediately. Throughout the ultimately unsuccessful campaign to enact the measure, Roosevelt was presented with numerous opportunities to compromise for a measure authorizing the appointment of fewer additional justices. The President rejected each of these proposals, and his refusal to compromise often has been attributed to stubbornness, overconfidence, or hubris. Yet an examination of the papers of Attorney General Homer S. Cummings reveals why FDR and his advisors believed that he required no fewer than …
The Confident Court, Jennifer Mason Mcaward
The Confident Court, Jennifer Mason Mcaward
Journal Articles
Despite longstanding rules regarding judicial deference, the Supreme Court’s decisions in its October 2012 Term show that a majority of the Court is increasingly willing to supplant both the prudential and legal judgments of various institutional actors, including Congress, federal agencies, and state universities. Whatever the motivation for such a shift, this Essay simply suggests that today’s Supreme Court is a confident one. A core group of justices has an increasingly self-assured view of the judiciary’s ability to conduct an independent assessment of both the legal and factual aspects of the cases that come before the Court. This piece discusses …
General Law In Federal Court, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia
General Law In Federal Court, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia
Journal Articles
Conventional wisdom maintains that the Supreme Court banished general law from federal courts in 1938 in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins when the Court overruled Swift v. Tyson. The narrative asserts that Swift viewed the common law as a “brooding omnipresence,” and authorized federal courts to disregard state common law in favor of general common law of their own choosing. The narrative continues that Erie constrained such judicial lawmaking by banishing general law from federal courts. Contrary to this account, Swift and Erie represent compatible conceptions of federal judicial power when each decision is understood in historical context. At the …
The Court-Packing Plan As Symptom, Casualty, And Cause Of Gridlock, Barry Cushman
The Court-Packing Plan As Symptom, Casualty, And Cause Of Gridlock, Barry Cushman
Journal Articles
This essay, prepared for the Notre Dame Law Review's Symposium, “The American Congress: Legal Implications of Gridlock,” considers three ways in which President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1937 Court-packing bill was related to the phenomenon of gridlock in the 1930s. First, as FDR's public remarks on the subject demonstrate, he believed that the early New Deal was a victim of partisan gridlock between the Democrat-controlled political branches and the Republican-controlled judiciary. Moreover, he did not believe that the impasse could be overcome through an amendment to the Constitution, for he regarded Article V's supermajority requirements as virtually encoding gridlock into the …