Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (9)
- Supreme Court of the United States (8)
- Courts (5)
- Judges (5)
- Jurisprudence (4)
-
- American Politics (2)
- Arts and Humanities (2)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- First Amendment (2)
- Law and Gender (2)
- Political Science (2)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (2)
- African American Studies (1)
- Banking and Finance Law (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Common Law (1)
- European Law (1)
- Family Law (1)
- Film and Media Studies (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- History (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- Inequality and Stratification (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Land Use Law (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Institution
- Publication Year
Articles 1 - 19 of 19
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Supreme Court And The People: Communicating Decisions To The Public, Barry Sullivan, Ramon Feldbrin
The Supreme Court And The People: Communicating Decisions To The Public, Barry Sullivan, Ramon Feldbrin
Faculty Publications & Other Works
Although the individual Justices of the Supreme Court frequently speak to the public, the Court as an entity holds fast to the purportedly ancient principle that courts should speak only through their official written opinions—the meaning of which is for others to figure out. Over the years, the Court’s decisions have become more complex, prolix, and fractured, making it difficult and time-consuming for anyone outside the professional elites to determine what the Court has held. Even journalists, who attempt to explain the Court’s decisions to the public, struggle to make sense of the Justices’ opinions under the pressures generated by …
Comparative Judicialism, Popular Sovereignty, And The Rule Of Law: The Us And Uk Supreme Courts, Lissa Griffin, Thomas Kidney
Comparative Judicialism, Popular Sovereignty, And The Rule Of Law: The Us And Uk Supreme Courts, Lissa Griffin, Thomas Kidney
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
What does the future hold for the US and UK Supreme Courts? Both courts face an uncertain future in which their roles in their constitutional systems will come under intense scrutiny and pressure. The tension between the rule of law, often seen as the preserve of the judicial branches of government, and the sovereignty of the elected branches is palpable. In a time of the “strong man,” allegedly “populist leaders” who seemingly are pushing the limits of the rule of law, the breakdown of collaboration and debate, and the ever-present influence of social media, this tension will only become more …
Judicial Precedent In Emerging Constitutional Jurisdictions: Formulating A Doctrine Of Constitutional Stare Decisis For Singapore, Kenny Chng
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
Judicial precedents in constitutional law raiseunique stare decisis considerations. While they are authoritative pronouncementson the proper interpretation of the Constitution and are thus an essentialcomponent of constitutional law, they are also merely judicial precedents – andthus susceptible to being overturned. These considerations have been thesubject of a well-developed body of literature, especially in the context of USSupreme Court constitutional precedents.Yet, despite being a constitutional supremacy, little attention has beenpaid in Singapore to the question of the proper judicial approach towardsconstitutional precedents. This paper aims to address this issue. It will discernthe de facto principles that Singapore judges have thus far …
Notoriously Ruthless: The Idolization Of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Lucille Moran
Notoriously Ruthless: The Idolization Of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Lucille Moran
Political Science Honors Projects
It is now a fixture of mainstream commentary in the United States that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has become a popular idol on the political left. Yet, while Justice Ginsburg’s image and story has reached an unprecedented level of valorization and even commercialization, scholars have yet to give sustained attention to the phenomenon and to contextualize it: why has this idolization emerged within this context, and what is its impact? This paper situates her portrayal in the cultural imagination as the product of two political forces, namely partisanship and identity politics. Considering parallel scholarly discourses of reputation, celebrity, …
Anti-Gay Colorado Baker Prevails In Narrow Ruling, Arthur S. Leonard
Anti-Gay Colorado Baker Prevails In Narrow Ruling, Arthur S. Leonard
Other Publications
No abstract provided.
How Texas Governor Hopes To Undo Marriage Equality, Arthur S. Leonard
How Texas Governor Hopes To Undo Marriage Equality, Arthur S. Leonard
Other Publications
No abstract provided.
'Dred Scott V. Sandford' Analysis, Sarah E. Roessler
'Dred Scott V. Sandford' Analysis, Sarah E. Roessler
Student Publications
The Scott v. Sandford decision will forever be known as a dark moment in America's history. The Supreme Court chose to rule on a controversial issue, and they made the wrong decision. Scott v. Sandford is an example of what can happen when the Court chooses to side with personal opinion instead of what is right.
Crosses And Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays In The Us And Europe, Mark L. Movsesian
Crosses And Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays In The Us And Europe, Mark L. Movsesian
Faculty Publications
This article compares the recent jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights on the question of state-sponsored religious displays. Both tribunals insist that states have a duty of religious “neutrality,” but each defines that term differently. For the Supreme Court, neutrality means that government may not proselytize, even indirectly, or appear to favor a particular church; neutrality may even mean that government must not endorse religion generally. For the ECtHR, by contrast, neutrality means only that government must avoid active religious indoctrination; the ECtHR allows government to give “preponderant visibility” to the symbols of …
Remaking The United States Supreme Court In The Courts' Of Appeals Image, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie
Remaking The United States Supreme Court In The Courts' Of Appeals Image, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
We argue that Congress should remake the United States Supreme Court in the U.S. courts' of appeals image by increasing the size of the Court's membership, authorizing panel decision making, and retaining an en banc procedure for select cases. In so doing, Congress would expand the Court's capacity to decide cases, facilitating enhanced clarity and consistency in the law as well as heightened monitoring of lower courts and the other branches. Remaking the Court in this way would not only expand the Court's decision making capacity but also improve the Court's composition, competence, and functioning.
Does "Proceeds" Really Mean "Net Profits"? The Supreme Court's Efforts To Diminish The Utility Of The Federal Money Laundering Statute, Jimmy Gurule
Journal Articles
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Santos is severely hampers the fight against drug traffickers, terrorists, mobsters and white collar criminals. It restricts the scope of the money laundering statute, defining the term “proceeds” in it as net profits, not gross receipts from unlawful activity. This imposes an unreasonable and unwarranted burden on prosecutors to prove net criminal profits, money acquired beyond the defendant’s overhead expenses from unlawful activities. The court’s holding also restricts other provisions of the money laundering statute, such as the concealment theory of money laundering, and it creates confusion over whether the Court’s restrictive …
Federalism And Accountability, Timothy Meyer
Federalism And Accountability, Timothy Meyer
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This article examines how one particular state institution, state attorneys general (SAGs), has operated within a unique set of institutional and political constraints to create state-based regulation with nationwide impact in policy areas including consumer protection, antitrust, environmental regulation, and securities regulation. This state-based regulation casts doubt on one of the principle rationales advanced in the Supreme Court's anticommandeering line of cases for limiting federal power; namely, that judicially-enforced limits on federal power enhance electoral accountability, a concept central to our democracy. If in the absence of federal regulation narrowly accountable state-based actors from a small number of states can …
The Most Dangerous Justice Rides Into The Sunset, Paul H. Edelman, Jim Chen
The Most Dangerous Justice Rides Into The Sunset, Paul H. Edelman, Jim Chen
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In this essay, our third and last in a series, we employ our previously developed techniques to measure the power of the Justices in the Rehnquist Court over its full 11 year run. Once again, Justice Kennedy rises to the top of our rankings, as he had done earlier. Our methods identify Justices Souter, Breyer and Ginsburg as being notable either for their influence or lack thereof. In addition, we rejoin the debate on the connection between being the median justice and being the most powerful one. We question whether even the most sophisticated methods of finding the median justice …
Foreign Law And The U.S. Constitution, Kenneth Anderson
Foreign Law And The U.S. Constitution, Kenneth Anderson
Popular Media
The use of foreign law and unratified international treaty law by U.S. courts in U.S. constitutional adjudication has emerged as a major debate among justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, with Justice Anthony Kennedy writing for a majority approving the practice in the March 2005 decision of Roper v. Simmons, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer undertaking an unusual public discussion of the practice in January 2005 at American University law school. This article examines the arguments made by Justices Kennedy, Scalia, and Breyer for and against the practice, setting them in the broader context of constitutional theory. It …
Hail To The Chief: Former Law Clerks For William Rehnquist Recall What They Learned And How He Touched Their Lives, Craig M. Bradley, Laura E. Little, John C. Englander, Celestine Richards Mcconville
Hail To The Chief: Former Law Clerks For William Rehnquist Recall What They Learned And How He Touched Their Lives, Craig M. Bradley, Laura E. Little, John C. Englander, Celestine Richards Mcconville
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who died Sept. 3, is remembered for his disarming warmth and humor, breadth of knowledge about the law, and insistence that there is life outside the office. Few knew him better than the legions of clerks who tolled with and learned from him. Indeed, the sheer number who attended his funeral testifies to how highly he was regarded. Here, four former clerks from the decades of the 1970s, '80s and '90s write about their own particular memories of the late chief justice.
2002 U.S. Supreme Court Term Includes Zoning Referendum Case, Patricia E. Salkin
2002 U.S. Supreme Court Term Includes Zoning Referendum Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Most Dangerous Justice Rides Again: Revisiting The Power Pageant Of The Justices, Paul H. Edelman, Jim Chen
The Most Dangerous Justice Rides Again: Revisiting The Power Pageant Of The Justices, Paul H. Edelman, Jim Chen
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Who is the most powerful Supreme Court Justice? In 1996 we measured voting power on the Court according to each Justice's ability to form five-member coalitions. From the set of all coalitions formed by the Court during its 1994 and 1995 Terms, we developed a generalized Banzhaf index of the Justices' relative strength. Generally speaking, participating in a greater number of unique coalitions translates into greater judicial voting power. To supplement the small number of decisions then available, we derived hypothetical five-Justice coalitions from the intersections of actually observed coalitions involving more than five members. Professor Lynn Baker contested our …
All Or Nothing: Explaining The Size Of Supreme Court Majorities, Paul H. Edelman, Suzanna Sherry
All Or Nothing: Explaining The Size Of Supreme Court Majorities, Paul H. Edelman, Suzanna Sherry
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In this Article, Professors Edelman and Sherry use a probabilistic model to explore the process of coalition formation on the United States Supreme Court. They identify coalition formation as a Markov process with absorbing states and examine voting patterns from twelve Court Terms. On the basis of their data, they conclude that Justices are reluctant to remain in small minorities. Surprisingly, however, they also find that a three-Justice minority coalition is less likely to suffer defections than a four-Justice minority coalition. This counterintuitive result suggests that while in general it is minority Justices rather than majority Justices who drive the …
The Most Dangerous Justice: The Supreme Court At The Bar Of Mathematics, Paul H. Edelman, Jim Chen
The Most Dangerous Justice: The Supreme Court At The Bar Of Mathematics, Paul H. Edelman, Jim Chen
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
We analyze the relative voting power of the Justices based upon Supreme Court decisions during October Term 1994 and October Term 1995. We take two approaches, both based on ideas derived from cooperative game theory. One of the measures we use has been used in connection with voting rights cases. After naming the Most Dangerous Justice, we conclude by identifying and explaining the inverse relationship between seniority and voting power.
The Preiser Puzzle: Continued Frustrating Conflict Between The Civil Rights And Habeas Corpus Remedies For State Prisoners, Martin A. Schwartz
The Preiser Puzzle: Continued Frustrating Conflict Between The Civil Rights And Habeas Corpus Remedies For State Prisoners, Martin A. Schwartz
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.