Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2009

Supreme Court of the United States

Institution
Keyword
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 1 - 30 of 98

Full-Text Articles in Law

Demosprudence, Interactive Federalism, And Twenty Years Of Sheff V. O'Neill, Justin R. Long Dec 2009

Demosprudence, Interactive Federalism, And Twenty Years Of Sheff V. O'Neill, Justin R. Long

Law Faculty Research Publications

Professor Lani Guinier and others have recently developed a theory called "demosprudence" that explains the democracy-enhancing potential of certain types of US. Supreme Court dissents. Separately, state constitutionalists have described state constitutions' capacity to offer a base of resistance against the U.S. Supreme Court's narrow conception of individual rights. Applying these two seemingly unrelated theories to school desegregation litigation in Connecticut and to same-sex marriage litigation in Iowa, this Essay suggests that certain state constitutional decisions might function like U.S. Supreme Court dissents to enhance democratic activism. In this way, interactive federalism might usefully serve as a ...


Public Use, Public Choice, And The Urban Growth Machine: Competing Political Economies Of Takings Law, Daniel A. Lyons Dec 2009

Public Use, Public Choice, And The Urban Growth Machine: Competing Political Economies Of Takings Law, Daniel A. Lyons

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Kelo decision has unleashed a tidal wave of legislative reforms ostensibly seeking to control eminent domain abuse. But as a policy matter, it is impossible to determine what limits should be placed upon local government without understanding how cities grow and develop, and how local governments make decisions to shape the communities over which they preside. This Article examines takings through two very different models of urban political economy: public choice theory and the quasi-Marxist Urban Growth Machine model. These models approach takings from diametrically opposite perspectives, and offer differing perspectives at the margin regarding proper and improper condemnations ...


The Irrelevancy Of The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Thomas K. Clancy Dec 2009

The Irrelevancy Of The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Thomas K. Clancy

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Since John Roberts Jr. became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, there has been a measurable decline in the number of cases addressing Fourth Amendment questions. This article examines the reasons for that decline and predicts the substantial elimination of Fourth Amendment litigation in the Roberts Court. The prediction is based on several premises, including the lack of interest of the Justices on the Court concerning search and seizures principles and two significant recent cases, Pearson v. Callahan and United States v. Herring, which presage a significant decline in the number of lower court cases addressing the merits of the ...


The Fourth Amendment, The Exclusionary Rule, And The Roberts Court: Normative And Empirical Dimensions Of The Over-Deterrence Hypothesis, Donald Dripps Dec 2009

The Fourth Amendment, The Exclusionary Rule, And The Roberts Court: Normative And Empirical Dimensions Of The Over-Deterrence Hypothesis, Donald Dripps

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This essay engages in the risky business of predicting future Supreme Court developments. In the first part, I analyze the evidence suggesting that the Roberts Court might abolish the exclusionary rule. The critique of exclusion in Hudson v. Michigan is both less and more probative than appears at first blush. Part II turns to some less obvious evidence pointing in the direction of retaining the exclusionary rule. First, abolition of the exclusionary rule is inconsistent with the Hudson majority's apparent content with prevailing police behavior. Second, abolition of the exclusionary rule would curtail the power of the Supreme Court ...


The Structural Case For Vertical Maximalism, Tara Leigh Grove Nov 2009

The Structural Case For Vertical Maximalism, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

Many prominent jurists and scholars, including those with outlooks as diverse as Chief Justice John Roberts and Cass Sunstein, have recently advocated a “minimalist” approach to opinion writing at the Supreme Court. They assert that the Court should issue narrow, fact-bound decisions that do not resolve much beyond the case before it. I argue that minimalism, as employed by the current Supreme Court, is in tension with the structure of the Constitution. Article III and the Supremacy Clause, along with historical evidence from the Founding Era, suggest that the Constitution creates a hierarchical judiciary and gives the Court a “supreme ...


Mary L. Dudziak's Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall’S African Journey (Book Review), Makau Wa Mutua Nov 2009

Mary L. Dudziak's Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall’S African Journey (Book Review), Makau Wa Mutua

Book Reviews

This review of Mary Dudziak’s hugely important book contends that the author conflates the struggle for civil rights in the United States with the struggle for black majority rule in Kenya. While the two struggles are linked by white domination and the quest for blacks to free themselves from that domination, the book fails to interrogate and contextualize the limitations of equal protection norms for minorities in two vastly different political milieus. Dudziak does not problematize Thurgood Marshall’s blind insistence that the independence Kenyan constitution accord the economically dominant and oppressive white minority in colonial Kenya the same ...


Professor Robert E. Shepherd, Jr.: Tending To His Flock To Improve Its Lot, John P. Cunningham Nov 2009

Professor Robert E. Shepherd, Jr.: Tending To His Flock To Improve Its Lot, John P. Cunningham

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Liberal Tradition Of The Supreme Court Clerkship: Its Rise, Fall, And Reincarnation?, William E. Nelson, Harvey Rishikof, I. Scott Messinger, Michael Jo Nov 2009

The Liberal Tradition Of The Supreme Court Clerkship: Its Rise, Fall, And Reincarnation?, William E. Nelson, Harvey Rishikof, I. Scott Messinger, Michael Jo

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Article presents the first comprehensive empirical study of the post-clerkship employment of law clerks at the Supreme Court from 1882 to the present, and it uses that data to flesh out a historical and institutional interpretation of the clerkship and the recent political polarization of the Court more generally. The liberal tradition of the clerkship arose out of Louis Brandeis's vision of former law clerks serving a progressive legal agenda, a tradition that Felix Frankfurter helped institutionalize while striving to remove ideological bias. With the advent of a conservative bloc on the Court, this tradition has waned, due ...


In Memoriam: Robert E. Shepherd, Jr., John G. Douglass Nov 2009

In Memoriam: Robert E. Shepherd, Jr., John G. Douglass

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Professor Robert E. Shepherd, Jr. September 22, 1937 - December 11, 2008, Hon. Walter S. Felton Jr. Nov 2009

Professor Robert E. Shepherd, Jr. September 22, 1937 - December 11, 2008, Hon. Walter S. Felton Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


What Kinds Of Statutory Restrictions Are Jurisdictional?, Scott Dodson Oct 2009

What Kinds Of Statutory Restrictions Are Jurisdictional?, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

Section 411(a) of the Copyright Act of 1976 provides that “no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until preregistration or registration of the copyright claim has been made.” In this case, a district court approved a class action settlement that purported to resolve both registered and unregistered copyright claims. The Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether that registration requirement is a limitation on federal court subject-matter jurisdiction.


Section 5: Individual Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

Section 5: Individual Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 4: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

Section 4: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 3: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

Section 3: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 1: Moot Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

Section 1: Moot Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


2009-2010 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

2009-2010 Supreme Court Preview: Schedule, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


2009-2010 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

2009-2010 Supreme Court Preview: Contents, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 2: Justice Sotomayor The Supreme Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School Oct 2009

Section 2: Justice Sotomayor The Supreme Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Understanding Pleading Doctrine, A. Benjamin Spencer Oct 2009

Understanding Pleading Doctrine, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Where does pleading doctrine, at the federal level, stand today? The Supreme Court's revision of general pleading standards in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly has not left courts and litigants with a clear or precise understanding of what it takes to state a claim that can survive a motion to dismiss. Claimants are required to show "plausible entitlement to relief" by offering enough facts "to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Translating those admonitions into predictable and consistent guidelines has proven illusory. This Article proposes a descriptive theory that explains the fundaments of contemporary pleading doctrine ...


The Hundred-Years War: The Ongoing Battle Between Courts And Agencies Over The Right To Interpret Federal Law, Nancy M. Modesitt Oct 2009

The Hundred-Years War: The Ongoing Battle Between Courts And Agencies Over The Right To Interpret Federal Law, Nancy M. Modesitt

All Faculty Scholarship

Since the Supreme Court’s 1984 Chevron decision, the primary responsibility for interpreting federal statutes has increasingly resided with federal agencies in the first instance rather than with the federal courts. In 2005, the Court reinforced this approach by deciding National Telecommunications Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Services, which legitimized the agency practice of interpreting federal statutes in a manner contrary to the federal courts' established interpretation, so long as the agency interpretation is entitled to deference under the well-established Chevron standard. In essence, agencies are free to disregard federal court precedent in these circumstances. This Article analyzes the ...


In Defense Of Ideology: A Principled Apporach To The Supreme Court Confirmation Process, Lori A. Ringhand Oct 2009

In Defense Of Ideology: A Principled Apporach To The Supreme Court Confirmation Process, Lori A. Ringhand

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In this paper, Professor Ringhand offers a principled defense of an ideological approach to the Supreme Court Justice confirmation process. In constructing her argument, she does three things. First, she explores how the insights provided by recent empirical legal scholarship have created a need to rethink the role of the Supreme Court and, consequently, the process by which we select Supreme Court Justices. In doing so, Professor Ringhand explains how these insights have called into question much of our conventional constitutional narrative, and how this failure of the conventional narrative has in turn undermined traditional objections to an ideologically-based confirmation ...


Rudkin Testamentary Trust -- A Response To Prof. Cohen, Douglas A. Kahn Sep 2009

Rudkin Testamentary Trust -- A Response To Prof. Cohen, Douglas A. Kahn

Articles

In the August 3 issue of Tax Notes, Prof. Stephen Cohen wrote an article about Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s opinions in three tax cases. Of those three cases, only the opinion she wrote in William L. Rudkin Testamentary Trust v. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2006), Doc 2006- 21522, 2006 TNT 203-4, is worthy of comment. Although the Second Circuit’s decision in that case was affirmed by the Supreme Court under the name Knight v. Commissioner, the construction of the critical statutory language that Justice Sotomayor adopted was rejected and criticized by Chief Justice Roberts, writing for ...


Issue 4: Table Of Contents May 2009

Issue 4: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Court Of Life And Death: The Two Tracks Of Constitutional Sentencing Law And The Case For Uniformity, Rachel E. Barkow May 2009

The Court Of Life And Death: The Two Tracks Of Constitutional Sentencing Law And The Case For Uniformity, Rachel E. Barkow

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court takes two very different approaches to substantive sentencing law. Whereas its review of capital sentences is robust, its oversight of noncapital sentences is virtually nonexistent. Under the Court's reading of the Constitution, states must draft death penalty statutes with enough guidance to avoid death sentences being imposed in an arbitrary and capricious manner Mandatory death sentences are disallowed, and the sentencing authority must have the opportunity to consider mitigating evidence. The Court will scrutinize whether the death sentence is proportionate to the crime and the defendant, and it has frequently exempted certain crimes and certain offenders ...


Book Review: Reconstruction And Reunion, 1864-88, Part One, David S. Bogen Apr 2009

Book Review: Reconstruction And Reunion, 1864-88, Part One, David S. Bogen

David S. Bogen

No abstract provided.


Book Review Of The Supreme Court: An Essential History, Leslie A. Street Apr 2009

Book Review Of The Supreme Court: An Essential History, Leslie A. Street

Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.


New Groups And Old Doctrine: Rethiking Congressional Power To Enforce The Equal Protection Clause, William D. Araiza Apr 2009

New Groups And Old Doctrine: Rethiking Congressional Power To Enforce The Equal Protection Clause, William D. Araiza

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Extraordinary Rendition: A Wrong Without A Right, Robert Johnson Mar 2009

Extraordinary Rendition: A Wrong Without A Right, Robert Johnson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Supreme Court’S Controversial Gvrs – And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl Mar 2009

The Supreme Court’S Controversial Gvrs – And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

This Article addresses a relatively neglected portion of the Supreme Court's docket: the "GVR"-that is, the Court's procedure for summarily granting certiorari, vacating the decision below without finding error, and remanding the case for further consideration by the lower court. The purpose of the GVR device is to give the lower court the initial opportunity to consider the possible impact of a new development (such as a recently issued Supreme Court decision) and, if necessary, to revise its ruling in light of the changed circumstances. The Court may issue scores or even hundreds of these orders every ...


The Supreme Court's Controversial Gvrs - And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl Mar 2009

The Supreme Court's Controversial Gvrs - And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Michigan Law Review

This Article addresses a relatively neglected portion of the Supreme Court's docket: the "GVR"-that is, the Court's procedure for summarily granting certiorari, vacating the decision below without finding error, and remanding the case for further consideration by the lower court. The purpose of the GVR device is to give the lower court the initial opportunity to consider the possible impact of a new development (such as a recently issued Supreme Court decision) and, if necessary, to revise its ruling in light of the changed circumstances. The Court may issue scores or even hundreds of these orders every ...