Courts Commons^™

The President's Signing Statement Upon Signing The National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2008: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On Oversight And Investigations Of The H. Comm. On Armed Services,, 110th Cong., Mar. 11, 2008 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Scrutiny Land, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Scrutiny Land is the place where government needs to justify to a court its restrictions on the liberties of the people. In the 1930s, the Supreme Court began limiting access to Scrutiny Land. While the New Deal Court merely shifted the burden to those challenging a law to show that a restriction of liberty is irrational, the Warren Court made the presumption of constitutionality effectively irrebuttable. After this, only one road to Scrutiny Land remained: showing that the liberty being restricted was a fundamental right. The Glucksberg Two-Step, however, limited the doctrine of fundamental rights to those (1) narrowly defined …

Does Doj's Privilege Waiver Policy Threaten The Rationales Underlying The Attorney-Client Privilege And Work Product Doctrine? A Preliminary "No", Julie R. O'Sullivan

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

According to white-collar defense practitioners, the demise of the corporate attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine is imminent. While a variety of assaults have been identified, by far the most oft-cited culprit is the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), whose prosecutors, it is charged, have routinely insisted that corporations waive these protections to secure cooperation credit and declination of criminal action against the corporate actor and/or consideration at sentencing. DOJ has, by and large, vigorously defended its policies in this regard. Congress now threatens to inject itself into the debate: legislation entitled the "Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act" has been introduced …

Climate Change In The Supreme Court, Lisa Heinzerling

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court confronted the issue of climate change for the first time. The Court held that the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate greenhouse gases and that the agency may not decline to exercise this authority based either on factors not present in the statute or inconclusive gestures toward uncertainty in the science of climate change. I had the privilege of serving as the lead author of the winning briefs in this case. This Article provides an insider's perspective on the choices that went into bringing and …

Restoring Congressional Intent And Protections Under The Americans With Disabilities Act: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions, 110th Cong., Nov. 15, 2007 (Statement Of Chai R. Feldblum, Geo. U. L. Center), Chai R. Feldblum

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

The Ada Restoration Act Of 2007: Hearing Before The H. Subcomm. On Constitution, Civil Rights, And Civil Liberties Of The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 110th Cong., Oct. 4, 2007 (Statement Of Statement Of Chai R. Feldblum, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Chai R. Feldblum

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

The Leegin Decision: The End Of The Consumer Discounts Or Good Antitrust Policy?: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On Antitrust, Competition Policy, And Consumer Rights Of The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 110th Cong., July 31, 2007 (Statement Of Robert Pitofsky, Geo. U. L. Center), Robert Pitofsky

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

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.

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.

Unlawful Enemy Combatants: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On Armed Services, 110th Cong., Apr. 26, 2007 (Statement Of Neal Kumar Katyal, Geo. U. L. Center), Neal K. Katyal

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Military Commissions Act And The Continued Use Of Guantanamo Bay As A Detention Facility: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On Armed Services, 110th Cong., Mar. 29, 2007 (Statement Of Professor Neal Kumar Katyal, Geo. U. L. Center), Neal K. Katyal

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Terrorism And Trial By Jury: The Vices And Virtues Of British And American Criminal Law, Laura K. Donohue

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

British tradition and the American Constitution guarantee trial by jury for serious crime. But terrorism is not ordinary crime, and the presence of jurors may skew the manner in which terrorist trials unfold in at least three significant ways. First, organized terrorist groups may deliberately threaten jury members so the accused escapes penalty. The more ingrained the terrorist organization in the fabric of society, the greater the degree of social control exerted under the ongoing threat of violence. Second, terrorism, at heart a political challenge, may itself politicize a jury. Where nationalist conflict rages, as it does in Northern Ireland, …

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 …

Presidential Signing Statements Under The Bush Administration: A Threat To Checks And Balances And The Rule Of Law?: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 110th Cong., Jan. 31, 2007 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Original Understanding And The Whether, Why, And How Of Judicial Review, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

For more than one hundred years, legal scholars have endlessly and heatedly debated whether judicial review of federal legislation was part of the original understanding of the Constitution. The stakes of the debate are high. If judicial review was part of the original understanding, then there is a strong argument that the practice is grounded in the majority’s will, just as the Founders’ Constitution is. But if it is not—if, as Alexander Bickel and others have claimed, judicial review was a sleight-of-hand creation of Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison—then judicial review is either counter-majoritarian or else must …

Affirmative Inaction, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Perhaps the most exasperating aspect of racial discrimination in the United States is the self-righteous manner in which it is practiced. After a history of facilitating white exploitation of minority interests, the Supreme Court intimated in Grutter v. Bollinger that time was running out for racial minorities to take advantage of the opportunities for equality that the culture has offered in the form of affirmative action. Justice O'Connor's majority opinion seemed to say that in another twenty-five years, the Court would cease to tolerate such special favors for racial minorities, thereby leaving minorities only a limited amount of time remaining …

Why The Court Said No, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Of The United States, October Term 2005 Overview, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute, Rebecca Cady

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

Presidential Signing Statements: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., June 27, 2006 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Clauses Not Cases, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Clauses Not Cases is a Response to Robert Post and Reva Siegel, Questioning Justice: Law and Politics in Judicial Confirmation Hearings, Yale L.J. (The Pocket Part), Jan. 2006.

In Questioning Justice, Robert Post and Reva Siegel make three claims. First, that the Constitution authorizes the Senate to rest its judgement, in part, on the constitutional philosophy of nominees to the Supreme Court; second, that this practice is justified on grounds of democratic legitimacy; and third, that it is best implemented by asking nominees “to explain the grounds on which they would have voted in past decisions of the …

What The Shutts Opt-Out Right Is And What It Ought To Be, Brian Wolfman, Alan B. Morrison

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article discusses the ramifications of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 (1985), regarding the right of an absent class member to opt out of a class action. The article addresses both the current prevailing understanding of Shutts, which is based on the personal jurisdiction strain of due process jurisprudence, and what the authors believe is a more useful understanding, based on the property rights strain of due process jurisprudence. As an addendum to the article, the authors propose a new civil procedure rule governing class actions that would implement …

Solicitors General Panel On The Legacy Of The Rehnquist Court, Seth P. Waxman, Walter E. Dellinger Iii, Maureen Mahoney, Theodore Olson, Drew S. Days Iii

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

All of us who are speaking probably share the same giddy feeling in front of a microphone with no red light. For years, my daughter told people that the greatest threat to Western civilization was her father at a podium without a red light. Before becoming Solicitor General, I spent my career as a trial lawyer, arguing only a few appeals. I found this red light tradition a little peculiar. More often than not, timers and lights in courts of appeals are viewed as advisory at best. I've had arguments where ten minutes were allocated per side, and yet argument …

The Liberal Legacy Of Bush V. Gore, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article examines the last ten years of the Rehnquist Court, which was divided evenly by the Court's highly controversial intervention in the 2000 presidential election, Bush v. Gore. I compare the Court's record before and after that decision both qualitatively and quantitatively, and argue that the Court shifted noticeably to the left, particularly in high-profile cases, after Bush v. Gore, as conservative Justices showed a greater willingness to side with their liberal colleagues to reach liberal results. I hypothesize that this may have reflected an effort, conscious or subconscious, to restore the Court's legitimacy by counteracting images of a …

Age And Tenure Of The Justices And Productivity Of The U.S. Supreme Court: Are Term Limits Necessary?, Joshua C. Teitelbaum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Article examines the relationship between the productivity of the U.S. Supreme Court and the age and tenure of the Supreme Court Justices. The motivation for this Article is the Supreme Court Renewal Act of 2005 (SCRA) and other recent proposals to impose term limits for Supreme Court Justices. The authors of the SCRA and others suggest that term limits are necessary because, inter alia, increased longevity and terms of service of the Justices have resulted in a decline in the productivity of the Court as measured by the number of cases accepted for review and the number of opinions …

The Supreme Court In Bondage: Constitutional Stare Decisis, Legal Formalism, And The Future Of Unenumerated Rights, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay advances a formalist conception of constitutional stare decisis. The author argues that instrumentalist accounts of precedent are inherently unsatisfying and that the Supreme Court should abandon adherence to the doctrine that it is free to overrule its own prior decisions. These moves are embedded in a larger theoretical framework--a revival of formalist ideas in legal theory that he calls "neoformalism" to distinguish his view from the so-called "formalism" caricatured by the legal realists (and from some other views that are called "formalist").

In Part II, The Critique of Unenumerated Constitutional Rights, the author sets the stage by …

Beyond Coercion: Justice Kennedy's Aversion To Animus, Steven Goldberg

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In evaluating the constitutionality of religious displays, Justice Kennedy adheres to the coercion test. A crèche on the courthouse steps is acceptable because it does not coerce anyone to support or participate in a religious exercise. He rejects the endorsement test, which asks whether the display makes reasonable nonadherents feel like outsiders, finding it to be “flawed in its fundamentals and unworkable in practice.” Yet in the free exercise context, Kennedy has focused on whether a community shows hostility to minority faiths, and his opinions in Romer and Lawrence stress that legislatures acted unconstitutionally in showing animus to gays. Suppose …

The Story Of Upjohn Co. V. United States: One Man's Journey To Extend Lawyer-Client Confidentiality, And The Social Forces That Affected It, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The attorney-client privilege protects information a client provides an attorney in confidence for the purpose of securing legal advice. But suppose the client is not a person but a corporation and can only speak through its agents and employees. What then are the contours of the privilege? If the corporation's attorney asks an employee for information relating to pending litigation or other legal matters, is the conversation privileged? Some courts said that no communications to a corporate attorney were privileged unless they came from members of the corporate control group, loosely those people who had authority to direct the attorney's …

Examination Of The Constitutional Amendment On Marriage: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On The Constitution, Civil Rights, And Property Rights Of The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., Oct. 20, 2005 (Statement Of Professor Louis Michael Seidman, Geo. U. L. Center), Louis Michael Seidman

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Nomination John G. Roberts: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., Sept. 15, 2005 (Statement Of Peter B. Edelman, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Peter B. Edelman

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

House Resolution On The Appropriate Role Of Foreign Judgments In The Interpretation Of The Constitution Of The United States: Hearing Before The Subcommittee On The Constitution, House Committee On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., July 19, 2005 (Statement Of Viet D. Dinh, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Viet D. Dinh

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.