Courts Commons^™

Present Frontiers In Constitutional Law, William T. Coleman Jr.

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

United States V. Tempia: The Questionable Application Of Miranda To The Military, James F. Falco

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

A Resurgence Of The Klaxon Controversy - Contemporary Legal Trends Revitalize An Old Principle, William H. Danne Jr.

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Rights In Juvenile Court, Joseph L. Rubin

Cleveland State Law Review

On June 20, 1966, the United States Supreme Court noted that it had probable jurisdiction in the case of In Re Gault. Ten months and three weeks later, the Supreme Court reached a landmark decision on judicial handling of juvenile delinquency matters. On May 15, 1967, the court handed down a ruling that many of the constitutional procedural protections previously observed only in adult trials are also applicable to children in juvenile court proceedings. This decision portends a major change in the manner in which most of the nation's three thousand juvenile courts have been functioning. The significance of this …

Contempt-Injunctions-Federal Civil Contempt Decree Orders Deputy Sheriff To Resign From Office-Lance V. Plummer, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

During the summer of 1964, a federal district judge issued an injunction prohibiting various St. Augustine, Florida organizations and other persons with notice of the injunction from harassing or intimidating Negroes who were seeking motel or restaurant accommodations. Appellant Lance, an unpaid volunteer deputy sheriff, was not a member of any of the enjoined organizations, but he had actual notice of the order. Nonetheless, six days after the injunction was issued, he engaged in activities designed to intimidate a Negro citizen. In a subsequent civil contempt action arising from these activities, the federal district judge, asserting jurisdiction over him because …

Equal Justice Under Law, The Supreme Court In Americanlife. The Foundation Of The Federal Bar Association., John W. H. Stewart

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Reapportionment Cases: Cognitive Lag, The Malady And Its Cure, E. F. Roberts, Paul T. Shultz Iii

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The reapportionment cases have been considered by many to be the product of a liberal, activist Court which is endeavoring to reshape America’s political life according to its own views. The authors of this article assert that, to the contrary, the Court actually is reacting to the incontrovertible fact of the modern predominance of urban complexities which have rendered inappropriate our older political boundaries. In this sense, they consider the Court’s decisions conservative rather than liberal- because the Court’s purpose is to maintain a version of federalism along state boundaries which may have become outmoded even before the Court entered …

Advisory Opinions As A Problem Solving Process, David Lenefsky

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Line Between Federal And State Court Jurisdiction, Leslie A. Anderson

Michigan Law Review

From the beginning of this nation, there have been controversies involving the division of jurisdiction between federal and state courts. Often, these controversies have centered on the diversity of citizenship provision of the federal constitution. Today, however, the more poignant question is whether any division of jurisdiction between the federal and state systems retains logical bases.

Although myriad developments have relevancy with respect to this question, I have here focused upon two of the more important ones: the increasing overlap of subject matter being litigated in federal and state courts and the growing uniformity of standards to be applied in …

Shmuel V. Attorney General, Moshe Landau, Alfred Witkon, Zvi Berinson, Shimon Agranat, Haim Herman Cohn

Translated Opinions

The Attorney-General applied for an order against the applicants to remove their children from a Christian missionary school where they had placed them and to arrange for the children's education in a Jewish school. In those proceedings in the Tel Aviv District Court, the applicants requested that the sitting judge should disqualify himself because he was an orthodox Jew and people might gain the impression that he would therefore not deal with the matter impartially. The judge refused to do so and the applicants moved the Supreme Court to have the hearings transferred to another judge of the Tel Aviv …

Constitutional Law-Elections-Jurisdiction Of State Courts To Entertain Actions Arising Out Of Congressional Elections, C. Douglas Kranwinkle

Michigan Law Review

Relator was the losing candidate in an election for the office of Representative to the United States Congress. He commenced proceedings in the House, pursuant to statute, contesting the seating of his opponent, and petitioned the Minnesota Supreme Court to enjoin and restrain the Minnesota Secretary of State from issuing a certificate of election until the contest was finally determined. Relator based his petition on a Minnesota statute which provides that the Secretary of State may not issue a certificate of election in case of a contest until it has been determined by the proper court. A temporary injunction and …

Book Review, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This review of "The Supreme Court on Trial" by Charles Hyneman, questions why the work’s tackling the age-old issues of the source of judicial review and its constitutionality is particularly novel or unique from other such examinations. Issue is also taken with Brown v. Board of Educaion's dominance of such discussion and the book’s poor treatment of the desegregation cases.

Introduction, Joseph O'Meara

Journal Articles

A symposium was held on February 29, 1964, devoted to the constitutional amendments proposed by the Council of State Governments. Very briefly these amendments would (1) vest power to amend the Constitution in State legislatures; (2) set up a "Court of the Union," composed of the chief justice of the supreme court of each of the 50 states, which would have authority to review "any judgment of the Supreme Court relating to the rights reserved to the states or to the people by this Constitution"; (3) take from the federal courts all jurisdiction over the apportionment of representation in State …

The Powers Of Home Rule Cities In Colorado, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And Preclusion/Res Judicata, Allan D. Vestal

Michigan Law Review

The interrelation of lawsuits is one of the most troublesome, yet least commented upon, areas of the law. The ramifications are great; related lawsuits may be pending concurrently, either brought by the same individual-repetitive litigation--or brought by different parties-reactive litigation. Such lawsuits may occur serially over a period of time. The courts are then faced with problems which have traditionally been discussed in terms of res judicata, bar, merger, or estoppel. It is impossible to cover the whole area or even a sizable part of it in a single article, but it is feasible to examine one facet which certainly …

Dissenchick V. Attorney General, Yoel Sussman, Moshe Landau, Zvi Berinson

Translated Opinions

The trial of one Rafael Blitz for murder stretched over a number of days. On the second day. a newspaper (of which the first appellant was the editor and the second appellant the responsible journalist) published a report which indicated that in answer to the charge defence counsel had pleaded not guilty before the accused could say anything. In the body of the article it was reported that before trial the accused had in fact admitted his guilt to a journalist, although it was noted that such admission not having been made in court was not binding. The appellants were …

Legislative Apportionment And Representative Government: The Meaning Of Baker V. Carr, Jo Desha Lucas

Michigan Law Review

In three recent cases the Supreme Court has reopened the question of the extent to which federal courts will review the general fairness of state schemes of legislative apportionment. It is a question on which the Court has had nothing to say for over a decade, leaving the bar to patch together the current state of the law from the outcome of cases disposed of without opinion considered against a backdrop of language used in earlier decisions.

Gideon V. Wainwright: The Art Of Overruling, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

During the 1962 Term, the Supreme Court, on a single Monday, announced six decisions concerned with constitutional limitations upon state criminal procedure. The most publicized of these, though probably not the most important in terms of legal theory or practical effect, was Gideon v. Wainwright. In an era of constantly expanding federal restrictions on state criminal processes, the holding of Gideon-that an indigent defendant in a state criminal prosecution has an unqualified right to the appointment of counsel-was hardly startling. And while Gideon will obviously have an important effect in the handful of states that still fail to appoint counsel …

The Marshall Court: Nationalization Of Private Rights And Personal Liberty From The Authority Of The Commerce Clause, W. Howard Mann

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And Contempt Of Court, Ronald Goldfarb

Michigan Law Review

Few legal devices find conflict within the lines of our Constitution with the ubiquity of the contempt power. These conflicts involve issues concerning the governmental power structure such as the separation of powers and the delicate balancing of federal-state relations. In addition, there are civil rights issues attributable to the conflict between the use of the contempt power and such vital procedural protections as the right to trial by jury, freedom from self-incrimination, double jeopardy, and indictment-to name only the most recurrent and controversial examples. Aside from these problems, there are other civil liberties issues, such as those involving freedom …

Territorial Courts And Law: Unifying Factors In The Development Of American Legal Institutions-Pt.1-Establishment Of A Standardized Judicial System, William Wirt Blume, Elizabeth Gaspar Brown

Michigan Law Review

The United States first became a sovereign nation when individual states of the Confederation ceded to the states collectively their several interests in the lands west of the Appalachians which lay east of the Mississippi, north of Spanish Florida, and south of the Great Lakes. This area had been relinquished by Great Britain by the Treaty of 1783 and, with the exception of Kentucky, now became the property of the United States. It was the first area over which the states as a group had complete sovereignty, subject only to the claims of the various Indian tribes. Colonies fresh from …

Congressional Repair Of The Erie Derailment, Leonard V. Quigley

Michigan Law Review

It is the thesis of this article that such legislative review and repair is required today on the part of the federal legislature in regard to the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts. Such reconsideration is particularly appropriate where, as in the analogous commerce clause area, the subject matter has been committed specifically to the Congress by the Constitution.

Constitutional Law - Equal Protection - Racial Segregation Of Spectator Seating In Courtroom, Thomas W. Van Dyke

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, judge of a municipal court in Virginia, assigned seating on the basis of race in that part of his courtroom reserved for spectators and for those awaiting the call of their business before the court. The same number of seats were provided for Negroes as for whites. There was no separation of the races in the area immediately before the bench nor was there any complaint of discrimination in the administration of justice. Plaintiffs are Negroes who have been required on more than one occasion to occupy seats in the spectator section on a racially-segregated basis. In a suit …

Executive Privilege In The Federal Courts, Paul Hardin Iii

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Compulsory Disclosure And The First Amendment - The Scope Of Judicial Review, Robert B. Kent

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Involvement of the Supreme Court of the United States with highly charged public issues understandably occasions fresh debate concerning the proper role of the Court in determining questions of ultimate governmental power, in short, debate over the doctrine of judicial review.

As it is sometimes difficult for the judge to distinguish between what is unconstitutional and what is merely unwise, so it is difficult for the critic to disassociate his reaction to the results reached in a given case from his evaluation of the competence of the particular judicial performance. For some the failure to draw such a line robs …

The Supreme Court And The Decline Of State Power, Roger C. Cramton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Review Of Powers Of Single Judge Under Three-Judge Acts

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court And State Power To Deal With Subversion And Loyalty, Roger C. Cramton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In this Article, Professor Cramton discusses the effect of recent United States Supreme Court decisions on state control of Subversive activities. He finds that while the decisions to some extent restrict state activity in this area, and though the Court in its decisions gives the impression of vacillation and confusion, some definite and workable principles are emerging which contribute to a resolution of the inherent conflict of federal-state relations which these issues pose. He concludes that as the states grow more sophisticated in their treatment of these issues, so the policy of judicial self-restraint will become more influential in restricting …

"Federal Question" Jurisdiction -- A Snare And A Delusion, Ernest J. London

Michigan Law Review

Poorly defined criteria in the area of jurisdiction are especially wasteful, generating as they often do expensive and protracted litigation over threshold issues, rather than promoting the speedy determination of lawsuits on their merits. One of the most perplexing exercises in American law practice is the effort to define with certainty the original jurisdiction of the lower federal courts in matters where there is no diversity of citizenship. Although this general head of federal jurisdiction has persistently and pervasively been characterized as "federal question" jurisdiction, it is doubtful whether there is, in fact, original jurisdiction in the lower federal courts …