Law Commons^™

A Six-Three Rule: Reviving Consensus And Deference On The Supreme Court, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, the Supreme Court has struck down federal statutes by a bare majority with unprecedented frequency. This Article shows that five-four decisions regularly overturning acts of Congress are a relatively recent phenomenon, whereas earlier Courts generally exercised judicial review by supermajority voting.

One option is to establish the following rule: The Supreme Court may not declare an act of Congress unconstitutional without a two-thirds majority. The Supreme Court itself could establish this rule internally, just as it has created its nonmajority rules for granting certiorari and holds, or one Justice who would otherwise be the fifth …

The Elusive (But Worthwhile) Quest For A Diverse Bench In The New Millennium, Theresa M. Beiner

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reining In The American Litigator: The New Role Of American Judges, Richard L. Marcus

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Recalibrating Federal Judicial Independence Symposium: Perspectives On Judicial Independence: Accountability And Separation Of Power Issues, James J. Brudney

Faculty Scholarship

It is well settled that independent courts play a vital role in promoting rule-of-law and separation-of-powers norms. At the same time, judicial independence must be reconciled with other values that we also wish to recognize as foundational. Professor Brudney addresses two areas of controversy that are associated with the celebration of judicial autonomy in our legal culture. He first discusses the role of political and personal background factors in shaping judicial selection and influencing judicial outcomes. He explains why both the President and Congress have come to rely increasingly on such background factors when seeking to anticipate the broad contours …

The Norm Of Prior Judicial Experience And Its Consequences For Career Diversity On The U.S. Supreme Court, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Andrew D. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Political (Science) Context Of Judging, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Andrew D. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Incentives Approach To Patent Settlements: A Commentary On Hovenkamp, Janis & Lemley, Maureen A. O'Rourke

Faculty Scholarship

Professors Hovenkamp, Janis, and Lemley have attempted to clarify one of the most vexing issues facing antitrust and intellectual property law today: What analytical framework should antitrust authorities and courts use in considering whether patent settlement agreements in infringement cases violate the antitrust laws? The issue is complex because many ostensibly anticompetitive restraints in settlement agreements are perfectly legal if the underlying patent right is valid. Unfortunately, in some cases, the relevant patents are either invalid or not infringed. Thus, the antitrust analysis hinges on resolution of an intellectual property question.

Law And Judicial Duty, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Two hundred years ago, in Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice Marshall delivered an opinion that has come to dominate modern discussions of constitutional law. Faced with a conflict between an act of Congress and the U.S. Constitution, he explained what today is known as "judicial review." Marshall described judicial review in terms of a particular type of "superior law" and a particular type of "judicial duty." Rather than speak generally about the hierarchy within law, he focused on "written constitutions."

He declared that the U.S. Constitution is "a superior, paramount law" and that if "the constitution is superior to any …