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

Law Commons™

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

United States Supreme Court

Discipline
Institution
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 1051 - 1080 of 2103

Full-Text Articles in Law

Going To Pot, Carl E. Schneider Jan 2003

Going To Pot, Carl E. Schneider

Articles

In several earlier columns, I suggested that judges are usually poorly placed to make good biomedical policy, not least because the law so rarely offers them direct and cogent guidance. Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit proffered a new example of this old problem. In 1996, California's voters approved Proposition 215. Its "Compassionate Use Act of 1996" provided -that a patient "who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician" committed no crime.


Reinforcing Representation: Enforcing The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz Jan 2003

Reinforcing Representation: Enforcing The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …


Crawford V. Washington, Richard D. Friedman Jan 2003

Crawford V. Washington, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

On June 9, by granting certiorari in Crawford v. Washington, 02-9410, the Supreme Court signaled its intention to enter once again into the realm of the Confrontation Clause, in which it has found itself deeply perplexed. This time there was a difference, however, because the grant indicated that the Court might be willing to rethink its jurisprudence in this area. Crawford, like Lee v. Illinois, 476 U.S. 530 (1986), and Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116 (1999), presents a classic case of what might be called station-house testimony. Michael Crawford was accused of stabbing another man. His wife, Sylvia, was …


Thayerian Deference To Congress And Supreme Court Supermajority Rules: Lessons From The Past (Symposium: Congressional Power In The Shadow Of The Rehnquist Court: Strategies For The Future), Evan H. Caminker Jan 2003

Thayerian Deference To Congress And Supreme Court Supermajority Rules: Lessons From The Past (Symposium: Congressional Power In The Shadow Of The Rehnquist Court: Strategies For The Future), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Over the past eight years, the Supreme Court has been unusually aggressive in its exercise ofjudicial review over federal statutes challenged on federalism grounds. Eleven times the Court has invalidated provisions in federal statutes after determining that Congress exceeded the scope of its limited regulatory authority. In ten of the eleven cases, the vote was 5-4 with the identical five-Justice conservative majority (Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas) controlling the decision.


"Charting The Course Of Commerce Clause Challenge (Symposium: The Commerce Clause: Past, Present, And Future), Richard D. Friedman Jan 2003

"Charting The Course Of Commerce Clause Challenge (Symposium: The Commerce Clause: Past, Present, And Future), Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Recognizing Barry Cushman's formidable skills in both research and argument, and his enormous wealth of knowledge, I have long known that I would much rather be on the same side of an issue with him than on the opposite side. And I am glad that we have been on the same side of an important issue, for both of us doubt that Franklin Roosevelt's Court-packing plan had much to do with the constitutional transformation of the 1930s. But now I have expressed disagreement with some propositions he has asserted, and I have made some assertions with which he disagrees, he …


David E. Feller: The Happy Warrior, Theodore J. St. Antoine Jan 2003

David E. Feller: The Happy Warrior, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

Dave Feller and I first became acquainted when we were both union lawyers in Washington, D.C. Dave was the ultimate happy warrior. He went joyous into combat, and years later he could recount, joyously, objectively, and without rancor toward old foes, the exact details of the many triumphs and the few defeats. A favorite story came from his Supreme Court clerkship. Dave was already seven years out of Harvard Law School, with experience in university teaching, Army intelligence, and the Justice Department, and he didn't hesitate to tell Chief Justice Vinson he should vote for certiorari in a case close …


Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. And The Counterrevolution In The Federal Securities Laws, Adam C. Pritchard Jan 2003

Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. And The Counterrevolution In The Federal Securities Laws, Adam C. Pritchard

Articles

The confirmation of Lewis F. Powell, Jr., to the Supreme Court coincided with a dramatic shift in the Court's approach to securities law. This Article documents Powell's influence in changing the Court's direction in securities law. Powell's influence was the product of his extensive experience with the securities laws as a corporate lawyer, which gave him much greater familiarity with that body of law than his fellow Justices had. That experience also made him skeptical of civil liability, particularly class and derivative actions. Powell's skepticism led him to interpret the securities law in a consistently narrow fashion to reduce liability …


Equal Protection And Disparate Impact: Round Three, Richard A. Primus Jan 2003

Equal Protection And Disparate Impact: Round Three, Richard A. Primus

Articles

Prior inquiries into the relationship between equal protection and disparate impact have focused on whether equal protection entails a disparate impact standard and whether laws prohibiting disparate impacts can qualify as legislation enforcing equal rotection. In this Article, Professor Primus focuses on a third question: whether equal protection affirmatively forbids the use of statutory disparate impact standards. Like affirmative action, a statute restricting racially disparate impacts is a race-conscious mechanism designed to reallocate opportunities from some racial groups to others. Accordingly, the same individualist view of equal protection that has constrained the operation of affirmative action might also raise questions …


Expert Information And Expert Evidence: A Preliminary Taxonomy, Samuel R. Gross, Jennifer L. Mnookin Jan 2003

Expert Information And Expert Evidence: A Preliminary Taxonomy, Samuel R. Gross, Jennifer L. Mnookin

Articles

Federal Rule of Evidence 702 speaks in very general terms. It governs every situation in which "scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact," and provides that, in that situation, "a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise . . . .' In 2000, following a trio of Supreme Court cases interpreting Rule 702, the Rule was amended to include a third requirement, in addition to the helpfulness of the testimony and the qualifications of the witness: reliability. Under Rule 702 …


The Right To Receive Information, Susan Nevelow Mart Jan 2003

The Right To Receive Information, Susan Nevelow Mart

Publications

Ms. Mart examines the legal evolution of the right to receive information, particularly focusing on its application to libraries, beginning with the Supreme Court holding in Board of Education v. Pico, and followed by cases that have considered the meaning of Pico in a variety of library-related contexts.


Six Opinions By Mr. Justice Stevens: A New Methodology For Constitutional Cases?, Robert F. Nagel Jan 2003

Six Opinions By Mr. Justice Stevens: A New Methodology For Constitutional Cases?, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.


Rethinking The Death Penalty: Can We Define Who Deserves Death?, Martin Leahy, Robert Blecker, William M. Erlbaum, Jeffrey Fagan, Norman Greene, Jeffrey Kirchmeier, David Von Drehle Jan 2003

Rethinking The Death Penalty: Can We Define Who Deserves Death?, Martin Leahy, Robert Blecker, William M. Erlbaum, Jeffrey Fagan, Norman Greene, Jeffrey Kirchmeier, David Von Drehle

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.


Understanding Prophylactic Remedies Through The Looking Glass Of Bush V. Gore, Tracy A. Thomas Dec 2002

Understanding Prophylactic Remedies Through The Looking Glass Of Bush V. Gore, Tracy A. Thomas

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Using the context of Bush v. Gore as a vehicle for discussion, Professor Thomas examines the use and legitimacy of prophylactic remedies. In this Article, Professor Thomas advances the argument that the broad prophylactic remedy provided by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore may be viewed as contrary to the law of remedies in that it operated to negate, rather than enforce, legal rights. In particular, prophylactic remedies which are untailored and unachievable, as in Bush v. Gore, threaten the legitimacy of prophylaxis. Professor Thomas argues that the use of prophylactic remedies itself is not problematic, but concludes …


The Random Muse: Authorship And Indeterminacy, Alan R. Durham Dec 2002

The Random Muse: Authorship And Indeterminacy, Alan R. Durham

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.


Ties In The Supreme Court Of The United States, Edward A. Hartnett Dec 2002

Ties In The Supreme Court Of The United States, Edward A. Hartnett

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.


An Outcomes Analysis Of Scope Of Review Standards, Paul R. Verkuil Dec 2002

An Outcomes Analysis Of Scope Of Review Standards, Paul R. Verkuil

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.


Federal Judicial Selection As War, Part Three: The Role Of Ideology, Michael J. Gerhardt Oct 2002

Federal Judicial Selection As War, Part Three: The Role Of Ideology, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


The Federalism-Rights Nexus: Explaining Why Senate Democrats Tolerate Rehnquist Court Decision Making But Not The Rehnquist Court, Neal Devins Oct 2002

The Federalism-Rights Nexus: Explaining Why Senate Democrats Tolerate Rehnquist Court Decision Making But Not The Rehnquist Court, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


Section 10: Miscellaneous, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 10: Miscellaneous, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 3: The War On Terror, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 3: The War On Terror, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 8: Criminal Law & Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 8: Criminal Law & Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 6: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 6: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 5: Business Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 5: Business Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 1: Lockyer V. Andrade, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 1: Lockyer V. Andrade, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 2: Supreme Court Advocacy, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 2: Supreme Court Advocacy, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 4: First Amendment, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 4: First Amendment, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 7: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 7: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 9: Upcoming Issues, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School Sep 2002

Section 9: Upcoming Issues, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Marbury Ascendant: The Rehnquist Court And The Power To "Say What The Law Is", Timothy Zick Jul 2002

Marbury Ascendant: The Rehnquist Court And The Power To "Say What The Law Is", Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


After Ellerth: The Tangible Employment Action In Sexual Harassment Analysis, Susan Grover Jun 2002

After Ellerth: The Tangible Employment Action In Sexual Harassment Analysis, Susan Grover

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this Article, Professor Grover argues that courts too readily allow employers to avoid vicarious liability for supervisors' unlawful sexual harassment of subordinates. The Article explores the breadth of the affirmative defense first introduced in the Supreme Court's 1998 cases of Faragher v. Boca Raton and Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth. That defense clears an employer of liability for a supervisor's unlawful sexual harassment if (a) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and (b) the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the …