Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (29)
- William & Mary Law School (15)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (11)
- University of Richmond (7)
- University of Colorado Law School (6)
-
- Emory University School of Law (5)
- Boston University School of Law (3)
- Columbia Law School (3)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (3)
- University of Baltimore Law (3)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (2)
- Selected Works (2)
- UIC School of Law (2)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (2)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Georgia State University College of Law (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Dayton (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Montana (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (37)
- Supreme Court (12)
- Judicial review (5)
- Employment discrimination (4)
- Justices (4)
-
- Lawyers (4)
- Antitrust (3)
- Antitrust enforcement (3)
- Chicago School of antitrust (3)
- Civil rights (3)
- Death penalty (3)
- Federal agencies (3)
- Federal courts (3)
- First Amendment (3)
- Fourth Amendment (3)
- Litigation (3)
- State courts (3)
- Trials (3)
- Abortion (2)
- Barack Obama (2)
- Capital punishment (2)
- Certiorari (2)
- Child welfare (2)
- Children (2)
- Congress (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Constitutional interpretation (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Death (2)
- Decision-making (2)
- Publication
-
- Articles (13)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (9)
- All Faculty Scholarship (8)
- Faculty Publications (7)
- Faculty Scholarship (7)
-
- Supreme Court Preview (7)
- Other Publications (6)
- Publications (6)
- University of Richmond Law Review (6)
- Faculty Articles (5)
- Book Chapters (2)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (2)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Articles (2)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (2)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Book Reviews (1)
- Chimene I Keitner (1)
- David S. Bogen (1)
- Faculty Law Review Articles (1)
- Faculty Publications By Year (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Library Staff Publications (1)
- Management and Marketing Faculty Publications (1)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (1)
- Reviews (1)
- Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest (1)
- UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 91 - 104 of 104
Full-Text Articles in Law
Charles Evans Hughes, Richard D. Friedman
Charles Evans Hughes, Richard D. Friedman
Book Chapters
Hughes, Charles Evans (1862-1948). Lawyer, politician, diplomat, and chief justice of the United States. Hughes was born in Glens Falls, N.Y., the son of a Baptist preacher from the English- Welsh border country who changed congregations from time to time. Young Hughes spent his earliest years in several locations in New York and New Jersey before the family settled in Brooklyn. A precocious child, he was educated both at home and in public school. At age 14, he began college at Madison (now Colgate) University, a Baptist institution. After his sophomore year, he transferred to Brown, which also had a …
Constitutional Limits On Punitive Damages Awards: An Analysis Of Supreme Court Precedent, Dorothy S. Lund
Constitutional Limits On Punitive Damages Awards: An Analysis Of Supreme Court Precedent, Dorothy S. Lund
Faculty Scholarship
Over the last fifteen years, the Supreme Court has formulated new constitutional principles to constrain punitive damages awards imposed by state courts, invoking its authority under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This intervention has been controversial from the start, generating dissents from several Justices asserting that the actions of the Court are unwarranted and amount to unjustified judicial activism. Over the ensuing years lower courts and commentators have criticized the Court’s prescription of procedural and substantive limitations, finding them to be vague and unnecessarily restrictive of state common law prerogatives. Some observers with an economic orientation have …
Justice Ginsburg's Dissent In Bush V. Gore, Hugh Baxter
Justice Ginsburg's Dissent In Bush V. Gore, Hugh Baxter
Faculty Scholarship
In this essay, I examine Justice Ginsburg's dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore, the decision that ended the 2000 controversy over the winner of the presidency. I look critically at Justice Ginsburg's invocation of federalism-based deference to the Florida courts' interpretations of state election law in the recount controversy. I consider also Justice Ginsburg's criticisms of the Court's remedial decision to stop the recounts. Finally, I take up the much-debated question of how to understand Justice Ginsburg's final two words: "I dissent," rather than "I respectfully dissent." My conclusion is that the omission of "respectfully" is pointed, but not for …
Justice Ginsburg's Footnotes, Jay D. Wexler
Justice Ginsburg's Footnotes, Jay D. Wexler
Faculty Scholarship
In this short article written for the New England School of Law's March Symposium on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, I report on what happened when I embarked on a project of trying to read every single footnote Justice Ginsburg has ever written as a justice on the Supreme Court. As the article relates, this project was impossible to complete because Justice Ginsburg, it turns out, has written a lot, lot, lot of footnotes. Instead, I ended up reading all of Justice Ginsburg's footnotes from three of her terms. In the article, I develop a nine-part taxonomy of Supreme Court footnotes …
Giles V. California: A Personal Reflection, Richard D. Friedman
Giles V. California: A Personal Reflection, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In this Essay, Professor Friedman places Giles v. California in the context of the recent transformation of the law governing the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. He contends that a robust doctrine of forfeiture is an integral part of a sound conception of the confrontation right. One reason this is so is that cases fitting within the traditional hearsay exception for dying declarations can be explained as instances of forfeiture. This explanation leads to a simple structure of confrontation law, qualified by the principle that the confrontation right may be waived or forfeited but not subject to genuine exceptions. …
Withdrawal: The Roberts Court And The Retreat From Election Law, Ellen D. Katz
Withdrawal: The Roberts Court And The Retreat From Election Law, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Last Term the Supreme Court handed down four decisions that upheld diverse efforts by state governments to regulate the electoral process. The Court turned back challenges to New York’s method for nominating judicial candidates, Washington’s modified blanket primary system, Indiana’s voter identification requirement, and Alabama’s use of gubernatorial appointment to fill county commission vacancies in Mobile County. Unlike other recent election decisions, these were not close cases. All nine Justices supported the New York holding, while supermajorities voted in favor of the result in the others. This consensus, moreover, emerged even as the Court voted to reverse unanimous decisions by …
From Bush V. Gore To Namudno: A Response To Professor Amar, Ellen D. Katz
From Bush V. Gore To Namudno: A Response To Professor Amar, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
In his Dunwody Lecture, Professor Akhil Amar invites us to revisit the Bush v. Gore controversy and consider what went wrong. This short essay responds to Professor Amar by taking up his invitation and looking at the decision through a seemingly improbable lens, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last June in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. One (NAMUDNO) v. Holder. Among its many surprises, NAMUDNO helps illuminate the Court’s fundamental error nine years ago. Professor Amar forcefully argues that the mistrust with which the Justices in the Bush v. Gore majority viewed the Florida Supreme Court was both unjustified …
Barack Obama, Margarita Lopez Torres, And The Path To Nomination, Ellen D. Katz
Barack Obama, Margarita Lopez Torres, And The Path To Nomination, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Operating within these regimes, Obama was able to mount a credible--and ultimately successful--challenge to the leadership's choice for the nomination while Lopez Torres could not. This article offers an explanation why. It argues that Obama succeeded where Lopez Torres failed because the nomination process Obama traversed was more penetrable and more contestable than the one Lopez Torres faced.
Securities Law And The New Deal Justices, Adam C. Pritchard, Robert B. Thompson
Securities Law And The New Deal Justices, Adam C. Pritchard, Robert B. Thompson
Articles
In this Article, we explore the role of the New Deal Justices in enacting, defending, and interpreting the federal securities laws. Although we canvass most of the Court's securities law decisions from 1935 to 1955, we focus in particular on PUHCA, an act now lost to history for securities practitioners and scholars. At the time of the New Deal, PUHCA was the key point of engagement for defining the judicial view toward New Deal securities legislation. Taming the power of Wall Street required not just the concurrence of the legislative branch, but also the Supreme Court, a body that the …
Limits Of Interpretivism, Richard A. Primus
Limits Of Interpretivism, Richard A. Primus
Articles
Justice Stephen Markman sits on the Supreme Court of my home state of Michigan. In that capacity, he says, he is involved in a struggle between two kinds of judging. On one side are judges like him. They follow the rules. On the other side are unconstrained judges who decide cases on the basis of what they think the law ought to be. This picture is relatively simple, and Justice Markman apparently approves of its simplicity. But matters may in fact be a good deal more complex.
Linkline's Institutional Suspicions, Daniel A. Crane
Linkline's Institutional Suspicions, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
Antitrust scholars are having fun again. Not so long ago, they were the poor, redheaded stepchildren of the legal academy, either pining for the older days of rigorous antitrust enforcement or trying to kill off what was left of the enterprise. Other law professors felt sorry for them, ignored them, or both. But now antitrust is making a comeback of sorts. In one heady week in May of 2009, a front-page story in the New York Times reported the dramatic decision of Christine Varney-the Obama Administration's new Antitrust Division head at the Department of Justice-to jettison the entire report on …
Obama's Antitrust Agenda, Daniel A. Crane
Obama's Antitrust Agenda, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
Antitrust law is back in vogue. After years in the wilderness, antitrust enforcement has reemerged as a hot topic in Washington and in the legal academy. In one heady week inMay of 2009, a frontpage story in the New York Times reported the dramatic decision of Christine Varney —theObama administration’s new AntitrustDivision head—to jettison the entire report onmonopolization offenses released by the Bush JusticeDepartment just eightmonths earlier. In a speech before the Center for American Progress, Varney announced that the Justice Department is “committed to aggressively pursuing enforcement of Section 2 of the Sherman Act.” As if to prove that …
Procedural Obstacles To Reviewing Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel Claims In State And Federal Postconviction Proceedings., Eve Brensike Primus
Procedural Obstacles To Reviewing Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel Claims In State And Federal Postconviction Proceedings., Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel is one of the most frequently raised claims in state and federal postconviction petitions. This is hardly surprising given reports of trial attorneys who refuse to investigate their cases before trial, never meet with their clients before the day of trial, and fail to file any motions or object to inadmissible evidence offered at trial. Unfortunately, the current structure of indigent defense funding makes it impossible for many public defenders to provide effective representation to their clients.
International And Foreign Law Sources: Siren Song For Us Judges?, Chimene I. Keitner