Law Commons^™

October 19, 2007: World Magazine Interview With Bruce Ledewitz, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

World Magazine interview with Bruce Ledewitz

Supreme Court Report 2006-2007: Closing Of The Courthouse Doors?, Julie M. Cheslik, Andrea Mcmurty, Kristin Underwood

Faculty Works

This article reviews the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court for the 2006-2007 term focusing on decisions of particular relevance to state and local government. In reviewing those decisions, we focus on the shifts in the Court over time on those issues.

The expectation that the Supreme Court would shift to the right came to fruition in the 2006-07 term by the sheer lack of clear decisions on the merits. Time and again, the Court decided cases on the standing issue, never reaching the merits and frustrating litigants and citizens attempts to define their rights. Yale law professor Judith Resnick …

Umpires At Bat: On Integration And Legitimation, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

During his confirmation hearings. Chief Justice Roberts captured the public's imagination when he offered an interpretation of the role that judges play in our society when interpreting the Constitution. Judges and Justices are servants of the law, not the other way around, he said. Judges are like umpires. Umpires don't make the rules, they apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules, but it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ball game to see an umpire.

In this inquiry, I identify some tensions between the …

Rule Of Law Conference: Global Issues And The Rule Of Law, Lord Chief Justice Nicholas Phillips Of Worth Matravers

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Preacher Man V. Porn King: A Legal, Cultural, And Moral Drama Starring Jerry Falwell, Larry Flynt, And The First Amendment, Tory L. Lucas

Faculty Publications and Presentations

Take one part proselytizing, political Southern Baptist televangelist, one part obnoxious, media-seeking pornographer, and one part First Amendment free speech, and you get the colossal legal, cultural, and moral battle embodied in the seminal Supreme Court case of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. It all started in late 1983 with a controversial and despicable ad parody of a man and his mother that culminated in an aggressive legal battle between litigants on polar opposites of the moral and legal spectrum. Going behind the text of the Supreme Court decision, this article delves into the history behind the unique circumstances that made …

Supreme Court Of The United States, October Term 2007 Preview, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute, Rupal Doshi

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

The Press As An Interest Group: Mainstream Media In The United States Supreme Court, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

There can be little doubt that the institutional press is an interest group to be reckoned with in the Supreme Court, its aversion to such a designation notwithstanding. Over the past century, and especially since 1964, the press has secured for itself the greatest legal protection available anywhere in the world. While some of that protection has come from Congress, by far the greatest share has come from the Supreme Court's expansive interpretation of the First Amendment's Press Clause. Although the role of the press in American politics has been studied extensively for nearly two centuries, the role of the …

Supreme Court Of The United States, October Term 2006 Overview, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute, Rupal Doshi

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

The Challenge Of Implementing Atkins V. Virginia: How Legislatures And Courts Can Promote Accurate Assessments And Adjudications Of Mental Retardation In Death Penalty Cases, Richard J. Bonnie, Katherine Gustafson

University of Richmond Law Review

Our goal in this paper is to assist state courts and legislatures as they try to carry out the task that Atkins requires of them promoting fairness and accuracy in the assessment and adjudication of mental retardation. After addressing the definition ofmental retardation in Part I, we focus on its assessment in Parts II and III, highlighting several key requirements of a scientifi-cally and clinically adequate assessment.

Part II addresses the assessment of deficits in intellectual functioning, particularly on the measurement of intelligence as represented by an intelligence quotient. Appropriate IQ tests must be used, and the scores must be …

Looking Backward: Richard Epstein Ponders The “Progressive” Peril, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

In "How Progressives Rewrote the Constitution," Richard Epstein bemoans the growth of a dominant big government. How Progressives should receive a warm reception from the audience, lawyers and laypeople alike, who view the New Deal as a mistake of epic proportions. For the rest of us, significant gaps will still remain between, on the one hand, our understanding of the nation’s past and of the complex nature of constitutional lawmaking and, on the other, Epstein’s version of the nature of twentieth-century reform and Progressive jurisprudence.

The Rehnquist Court: A "By The Numbers" Retrospective, Lori A. Ringhand

Scholarly Works

The late Chief Justice William Rehnquist presided over the U.S. Supreme Court for nineteen years, longer than any other Chief Justice in the 20th century. Despite this longevity, however, there is little consensus on just what the legacy of the Rehnquist Court is. Was the Rehnquist Court a restrained Court that embraced a limited, text-based reading of the Constitution? Or was it a much more aggressive Court, responsible for a resurgence of conservative judicial activism? Is it best epitomized by the “swaggering confidence” that put a President in office, or the cautious minimalism that disappointed its conservative supporters by failing …

Passing The Buck: How The Supreme Court Could Have Sidestepped The Impact Of Its Controversial Decision In Smith V. City Of Jackson, Paul Stoehr

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.

After 150 Years, Worst Supreme Court Decision Ever Continues To Haunt, F. Michael Higginbotham

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1857, the Supreme Court rendered a decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, declaring that it had no jurisdiction to hear Dred Scott's claim to freedom because he was black and, therefore, not a citizen of the United States. This article argues that not only was the decision morally reprehensible, it was also based on an erroneous interpretation of the Constitution.

Mandatory Guidelines: The Oxymoronic State Of Sentencing After United States V. Booker, Hon. Graham C. Mullen, J. P. Davis

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reading, Writing, And Race: The Constitutionality Of Educational Strategies Designed To Teach Racial Literacy, Michael J. Kaufman

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Silenced Citizens: The Post-Garcetti Landscape For Public Sector Employees Working In National Security, Jamie Sasser

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why Preemption Proponents Are Wrong, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The basic idea of federal preemption is easily stated: It is a constitutionally mandated principle that demands that federal law trumps state law when the two conflict or in the rare instances when a federal law is so comprehensive that there’s no role left for state law to fill. But in practice, courts have often had difficulty applying the principle.

For plaintiff lawyers, preemption is an ever-present worry. When your client has been injured by a defective car, truck, medical device, boat, tobacco product, pesticide, or mislabeled drug, or has been victimized by a bank or other lending institution, the …

Gender And Justice: Parity And The United States Supreme Court, Paula A. Monopoli

Faculty Scholarship

There is a deep concern among many American women that only one woman remains on the United States Supreme Court. When Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was sworn in on September 25, 1981, most people never imagined that twenty-five years later there would still be only one woman on the Court. It appears that it will be many more years before there is a critical mass of women sitting on the high court. Given its central role, the Court should better represent the gender balance in American society. In a number of other countries, voluntary or involuntary parity provisions have been …

Supreme Court Of The United States, Poplar Creek Public Library District

Democracy/Government

Bibliography and photograph of a display of government documents from Poplar Creek Public Library District, Illinois.

The Return Of The Supreme Court To Patent Law, Timothy R. Holbrook

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This Article, composed from comments made at the Eighth Annual Sughrue Symposium University of Akron School of Law, explores the various Supreme Court decisions directly in or that relate or impact patent law. It also explores the then-pending cases. It concludes by noting the altered relationship between the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court.

The Third Death Of Federalism, A. Christopher Bryant

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Federal drug laws proved a stumbling block to the Rehnquist Court's attempted federalism revival. In its final year, the Court's fragile federalism coalition splintered in a pair of cases arising under the Controlled Substances Act ("CSA"). Missing from the emerging legal literature concerning those two decisions is any substantive discussion of the Supreme Court's much earlier, ill-fated efforts to preserve both judicial enforcement of the enumerated powers doctrine and federal narcotics laws. This article fills that gap.

Ninety-odd years ago the Court arrived at the same jurisprudential juncture it now confronts. In the early decades of the twentieth century, the …

Storm In A Teacup: The U.S. Supreme Court’S Use Of Foreign Law, Austen L. Parrish

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In this Article, Professor Parrish explores the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court's use of foreign law in constitutional adjudication. In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has used foreign law as persuasive authority in a number of highly contentious cases. The backlash has been spirited, with calls for foreign law to be categorically barred from constitutional adjudication, and even for Justices to be impeached if they cite to foreign sources. Last year, the condemnation of comparative constitutionalism reached a high note, as a barrage of scholarship decried the practice as illegitimate and a threat to our national sovereignty. The …

An Excess Of Methods: Identifying Implied Fundamental Rights In The Supreme Court, Robert C. Farrell

Saint Louis University Public Law Review

No abstract provided.

Misshapen Districts, Mistaken Jurisprudence: The Supreme Court’S Decisions On Partisan Gerrymandering, Alfred J. Caniglia Iii

Saint Louis University Public Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Standing And Removal Decisions From The Supreme Court's 2006 Term, Steven H. Steinglass

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article reviews some of the more important jurisdictional decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court during the court's 2006-07 term, the first full term that included both of the court's newest justices--Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Associate Samuel A. Alito Jr. The term begins an era that will likely become known as the Roberts Court, but this term surely belonged to Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who cast the deciding vote in all 24 of the court's 5-4 decisions.

Dueling Federalists: Supreme Court Decisions With Multiple Opinions Citing The Federalist, 1986-2007, Matthew J. Festa

Seattle University Law Review

This Article examines the use of history in legal interpretation through an empirical analysis of one of the most prominent examples of historical evidence in law: citations to The Federalist in Supreme Court Justices' published opinions. In particular, the Article examines a phenomenon that has occurred frequently over the last two decades, but has thus far been virtually ignored: the citation by different Justices to the same historical source (such as The Federalist) to support divergent or opposing historical interpretations of legal meaning. Although the use of historical evidence in constitutional interpretation is itself much debated, The Federalist continues …

An Empirical Analysis Of The Confirmation Hearings Of The Justices Of The Rehnquist Natural Court, Jason J. Czarnezki

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Despite the importance of this question, surprisingly little work has been done comparing the statements made by nominees at their confirmation hearings with their subsequent behavior on the Supreme Court. If the hearings reveal substantively valuable information about nominees' views, then we would expect to find a relationship between the Justices' statements and their judicial decisions. This Article is an initial look at that relationship. Specifically, we examine statements involving the nominees' views on stare decisis, originalism and legislative history, and also statements involving their views on the rights of criminal defendants. We then rank order the nominees' confirmation hearings …

Breaking Free Of Chevron's Constraints: Zuni Public School District No. 89 V. U.S. Department Of Education, Osamudia R. James

Articles

No abstract provided.

Politics Of Deference And Inclusion: Toward A Uniform Framework For The Analysis Of ‘Fundamental Alteration’ Under The Ada, Kerri Lynn Stone

Faculty Publications

In 2001, a disabled professional golfer prevailed in his claim to use a golf cart on the PGA Tour in the Supreme Court case of PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin. While the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) mandates that essential and reasonable accommodations be made for plaintiffs like Martin, it does not require any actions that would fundamentally alter the nature of a defendant’s “goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations.” This article surveys federal opinions that undertook the fundamental alteration query posed by Titles II and III of the ADA in the five years since Martin was decided, and …

Of Rules And Standards: Reconciling Statutory Limitations On "Arising Under" Jurisdiction, Richard D. Freer

Faculty Articles

Article III authorizes and the Judicial Code grants federal subject matter jurisdiction over civil cases "arising under" federal law. The Supreme Court has interpreted these words differently, however, in their constitutional and statutory contexts. While the constitutional text is read broadly, the Court has imposed three limitations on the same words in the statutory grants of federal question jurisdiction: (1) the ''well-pleaded complaint" rule; (2) a requirement that the federal issues be sufficiently "direct" or "central', to the dispute to justify access to the federal courts; and (3) a requirement that the federal assertion be "substantial." These limitations are meant …