Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Electing Our Judges And Judicial Independence: The Supreme Court's "Triple Whammy", Martin H. Belsky
Electing Our Judges And Judicial Independence: The Supreme Court's "Triple Whammy", Martin H. Belsky
ConLawNOW
In this article, Martin Belsky makes the case for judicial selection based on merit, as opposed to popular elections. Belsky cites Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company and the recent defeat of three Iowa supreme court justices because of their opinion in a controversial gay marriage case for the proposition that judicial elections can, and do, yield unjust results. Belsky asserts the need for judicial independence, but concludes that this goal is not achievable through elections because of the “triple whammy” of constitutional limitations: (1) the First Amendment protection of the right of judges and judicial candidates to give specific, …
The Roberts' Court Takes A Sledge Hammer To Ashwander And Cautious Constitutional Jurisprudence: Citizens United V. Federal Election Commisson, Allen Shoenberger
The Roberts' Court Takes A Sledge Hammer To Ashwander And Cautious Constitutional Jurisprudence: Citizens United V. Federal Election Commisson, Allen Shoenberger
ConLawNOW
In this January’s decision of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court overturned more than 100 years of legislative precedent, as well as its own precedent of twenty years, to permit corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on direct advocacy of the election or defeat of candidates for political office. The breadth of the holding is startling. Although the specific context considered a video-on-demand ninety minute diatribe regarding Presidential aspirant Hilary Clinton, the plain import of the holding reaches all federal and state elections, presidential, congressional, gubernatorial, judicial, and janitorial!
Chief Justice Roberts And The "Forty Thieves", Keith R. Fisher, Konstantina Vagenas
Chief Justice Roberts And The "Forty Thieves", Keith R. Fisher, Konstantina Vagenas
ConLawNOW
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose/ By any other name would smell as sweet.” Whether or not one agrees with the young Shakespeare about names – and many decidedly do not – numbers (as numerologists undoubtedly will assure you) are decidedly a different story and have always been thought to have extrinsic significance.
The number forty, for example, has extensive numerological significance, principally (though not exclusively) in biblical texts. A time period in the Bible – whether in days, months, or years and whether in the books of the Old or New Testament – that features …
Obergefell V. Hodges: How The Supreme Court Should Have Decided The Case, Adam Lamparello
Obergefell V. Hodges: How The Supreme Court Should Have Decided The Case, Adam Lamparello
ConLawNOW
In Obergefell, et al. v. Hodges, Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion legalizing same-sex marriage was based on “the mystical aphorisms of a fortune cookie,” and “indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.” Kennedy’s opinion was comprised largely of philosophical ramblings about liberty that have neither a constitutional foundation nor any conceptual limitation. The fictional opinion below arrives at the same conclusion, but the reasoning is based on equal protection rather than due process principles. The majority opinion holds that same-sex marriage bans violate the Equal Protection Clause because they: (1) discriminate on the basis of gender; (2) promote gender-based stereotypes; and …