Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (25)
- William & Mary Law School (16)
- University of Richmond (15)
- University of Colorado Law School (8)
- University of New Hampshire (5)
-
- American University Washington College of Law (4)
- Boston University School of Law (4)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (4)
- Columbia Law School (3)
- University of Baltimore Law (3)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (3)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (2)
- Selected Works (2)
- West Virginia University (2)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- UIC School of Law (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- Valparaiso University (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (27)
- Supreme Court (13)
- Constitution (11)
- States (9)
- Due process (8)
-
- Elections (8)
- Law reform (8)
- Electoral College (7)
- Electoral processes (7)
- Equality (7)
- Popular vote (7)
- Presidential elections (7)
- Presidents (7)
- Voting (7)
- Congress (5)
- Judicial process (5)
- Jurisdiction (5)
- Washington v. Glucksberg (5)
- California (4)
- Constitutional law (4)
- Damages (4)
- Decision making (4)
- Electoral compact (4)
- First amendment (4)
- History (4)
- Judicial review (4)
- SCOTUS (4)
- Capital punishment (3)
- Confrontation Clause (3)
- Constitutional amendments (3)
- Publication
-
- University of Richmond Law Review (13)
- Articles (12)
- Supreme Court Preview (10)
- Faculty Scholarship (7)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (7)
-
- Publications (7)
- All Faculty Scholarship (6)
- Michigan Law Review (6)
- Faculty Publications (5)
- The University of New Hampshire Law Review (5)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (4)
- Scholarly Articles (3)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (3)
- West Virginia Law Review (2)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Faculty Articles (1)
- Faculty Works (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Mark Graber (1)
- Matthew Parlow (1)
- North Carolina Central Law Review (1)
- Popular Media (1)
- Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest (1)
- Richmond Public Interest Law Review (1)
- Studio for Law and Culture (1)
- UIC Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 109
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Judicial Behavior Of Justice Souter In Criminal Cases And The Denial Of A Conservative Counterrevolution, Scott P. Johnson
The Judicial Behavior Of Justice Souter In Criminal Cases And The Denial Of A Conservative Counterrevolution, Scott P. Johnson
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] “The following article documents the judicial career of Justice David Souter from his time served as an attorney general and state judge in New Hampshire until his recent tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court. Based upon his written opinions and individual votes, Justice Souter clearly has evolved into a more liberal jurist than ideological conservatives would have preferred in the area of criminal justice. Over the course of his judicial career, Justice Souter has gained respect as an intellectual scholar by attempting to completely understand both sides of a dispute and applying precedent and legal rules in a flexible—albeit …
The Supreme Courts: Did September 11th Accelerate Their Sanctioning The Constitutionality Of Criminalizing Suspicion?, Dannye Holley
The Supreme Courts: Did September 11th Accelerate Their Sanctioning The Constitutionality Of Criminalizing Suspicion?, Dannye Holley
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
“This article evaluates whether the nation‘s highest appellate courts have, on balance, been more willing to acquiesce to criminalization based on suspicion since the attacks on the World Trade Center seven years ago. The article seeks to accomplish this evaluation by comparing decisions of the United States and state supreme courts in the six years prior to September 2001 with decisions in the six years following the terrorist attack— have the courts with the greatest authority to sanction the criminalization of suspicion been more willing to do just that? Such a post-September 11th trend would be significant because, despite the …
"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie
"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie
Vanderbilt Law Review
Article III is odd. In contrast to Articles 12 and II, which specify in some detail how the legislative and executive branches are to be assembled, Article III says virtually nothing about the institutional design of the Supreme Court.
Consistent with this Constitutional silence, the Court's look, shape, and behavior have adapted to changed circumstances. For example, the Court's membership has changed substantially. Initially, six Justices sat on the Court; in time, the Court grew to ten and shrank to seven. Only in 1869 did it settle at nine. Likewise, the Court's jurisdiction has changed, first expanding, then contracting, and …
Guarding The Guardians: Judges' Rights And Virginia's Judicial Inquiry And Review Commission, Jeffrey D. Mcmahan Jr.
Guarding The Guardians: Judges' Rights And Virginia's Judicial Inquiry And Review Commission, Jeffrey D. Mcmahan Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Railroad Law, Brent M. Timberlake
Railroad Law, Brent M. Timberlake
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Under-The-Table Overruling, Christopher J. Peters
Under-The-Table Overruling, Christopher J. Peters
All Faculty Scholarship
In this contribution to a Wayne Law Review symposium on the first three years of the Roberts Court, the author normatively assesses the Court's practice of "under-the-table overruling," or "underruling," in high-profile constitutional cases involving abortion, campaign-finance reform, and affirmative action. The Court "underrules" when it renders a decision that undercuts a recent precedent without admitting that it is doing so. The author contends that underruling either is not supported by, or is directly incompatible with, three common rationales for constitutional stare decisis: the noninstrumental rationale, the predictability rationale, and the legitimacy rationale. In particular, while the latter rationale - …
The Supreme Common Law Court Of The United States, Jack M. Beermann
The Supreme Common Law Court Of The United States, Jack M. Beermann
Faculty Scholarship
The U.S. Supreme Court's primary role in the history of the United States, especially in constitutional cases (and cases hovering in the universe of the Constitution), has been to limit Congress's ability to redefine and redistribute rights in a direction most people would characterize as liberal. In other words, the Supreme Court, for most of the history of the United States since the adoption of the Constitution, has been a conservative force against change and redistribution. The Court has used five distinct devices to advance its control over the law. First, it has construed rights-creating constitutional provisions narrowly when those …
2008-2009 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
2008-2009 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
2008-2009 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
2008-2009 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 1: Moot Court, Fcc V. Fox Television Stations, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 1: Moot Court, Fcc V. Fox Television Stations, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 3: Election Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 3: Election Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 4: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 4: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 2: 2008 Election And The Supreme Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 2: 2008 Election And The Supreme Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 6: Theories Of Interpretation, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 6: Theories Of Interpretation, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 5: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 5: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 7: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 7: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 8: Bush's Legal Legacy, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 8: Bush's Legal Legacy, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Does It Really Matter? Conservative Courts In A Conservative Era, Mark A. Graber
Does It Really Matter? Conservative Courts In A Conservative Era, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
This essay explores the likelihood that conservative federal courts in the near future will be agents of conservative social change. In particular, the paper assesses whether conservative justices on some issues will support more conservative policies than conservative elected officials are presently willing to enact and whether such judicial decisions will influence public policy. My primary conclusion is that, as long as conservatives remain politically ascendant in the elected branches of government, the Roberts Court is likely to influence American politics at the margins. The new conservative judicial majority is likely to be more libertarian than conservative majorities in the …
Unilateral Refusals To Deal, Vertical Integration, And The Essential Facility Doctrine, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Unilateral Refusals To Deal, Vertical Integration, And The Essential Facility Doctrine, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
Where it applies, the essential facility doctrine requires a monopolist to share its "essential facility." Since the only qualifying exclusionary practice is the refusal to share the facility itself, the doctrine comes about as close as antitrust ever does to condemning "no fault" monopolization. There is no independent justification for an essential facility doctrine separate and apart from general Section 2 doctrine governing the vertically integrated monopolist's refusal to deal. In its Trinko decision the Supreme Court placed that doctrine about where it should be. The Court did not categorically reject all unilateral refusal to deal claims, but it placed …
Rewriting Brown, Resurrecting Plessy, James E. Fleming
Rewriting Brown, Resurrecting Plessy, James E. Fleming
Faculty Scholarship
It is an honor and a pleasure to ponder Cooper v. AaronI and the legacy of Brown v. Board of Education2 in general and to respond to David A. Strauss's wise and insightful Childress Lecture3 in particular. I want to address three topics. The first two are encapsulated in my title: Rewriting Brown, Resurrecting Plessy. I'll examine the widespread phenomenon of "rewriting Brown." And I'll document what I shall call "resurrecting Plessy": the phenomenon, evident in both liberal and conservative scholarship and opinions, of charging one's opponents with repeating the mistakes of Plessy v. Ferguson.4 I'll illustrate the liberal version …
Dear President Bush: Leaving A Legacy On The Federal Bench, Carl Tobias
Dear President Bush: Leaving A Legacy On The Federal Bench, Carl Tobias
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Money As Property: The Effects Of Doctrinal Misallocation On Campaign Finance Reform, Maneesh Sharma
Money As Property: The Effects Of Doctrinal Misallocation On Campaign Finance Reform, Maneesh Sharma
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
By applying First Amendment jurisprudence to campaign finance measures, this Note argues that the Supreme Court has misallocated campaign finance within its doctrinal scheme. This doctrinal misallocation has stymied the ability of legislatures to enact effective reforms to reduce the role of money in politics. This Note argues that money in the political process more closely resembles property than speech and should therefore be analyzed under a less stringent property review. This Note concludes by proposing a standard of review developed from the Court's property jurisprudence.
The Early Roberts Court Attacks Congress's Power To Protect Civil Rights, Rochelle Bobroff
The Early Roberts Court Attacks Congress's Power To Protect Civil Rights, Rochelle Bobroff
North Carolina Central Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Failure Of Bowles V. Russell, Scott Dodson
The Failure Of Bowles V. Russell, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court recently decided Bowles v. Russell—perhaps that Term’s most underrated case—which characterized the time to file a civil notice of appeal as jurisdictional and therefore not subject to equitable excuses for noncompliance. In so holding, the Court overstated the supporting precedent, inflated the jurisdictional importance of statutes, and undermined an important recent movement to clarify when a rule is jurisdictional and when it is not. This did not have to be. The Court missed a golden opportunity to chart a middle course—holding the rule mandatory but nonjurisdictional—that would have been more consistent with precedent while resolving the …
An "Unintended Consequence": Dred Scott Reinterpreted, Sam Erman
An "Unintended Consequence": Dred Scott Reinterpreted, Sam Erman
Michigan Law Review
Austin Allen's monograph marks the 150th anniversary of the decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford with a revisionist interpretation of that oft-examined case. Many scholars have portrayed the case as a proslavery decision that fanned sectional fires. After all, the Court held that blacks were not U.S. citizens and that Congress was impotent to bar slavery in U.S. territories. Allen, by contrast, understands the case primarily as a judicial attempt to rationalize federal commerce and slavery jurisprudences. Part I argues that this ambitious reinterpretation enriches, but does not topple, existing Dred Scott historiography. In the case of the Court's citizenship …