Courts Commons^™

House Resolution On The Appropriate Role Of Foreign Judgements In The Interpretation Of The Constitution Of The United States: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On The Constitution, H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., July 19, 2005 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Overview, October Term 2004, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute, Kelly Falls

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

Preventing The Subversion Of Devlin V. Scardelletti, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Devlin v. Scardelletti that objecting class members could appeal a federal district court’s approval of a class settlement without first intervening in the litigation. Public interest lawyer Brian Wolfman says the ruling was a victory for both objectors and the integrity of class action procedure: Objectors, he argues, help keep fairness hearings fair.

But a number of courts are now ruling that Devlin only applies to non-opt-out class actions, rather than the much more numerous ones that give class members opt-out rights. In this article, Wolfman details the exact wording of the …

Reply Brief For Petitioner, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 04-702 (U.S. Jan. 03, 2005), Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Academics And The Federal Circuit: Is There A Gulf And How Do We Bridge It?, John R. Thomas

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Many of the great research universities of the United States enjoy a close relationship with innovators. Names like Carnegie, Cornell, Hopkins, Stanford, and Vanderbilt bring to mind not so much these men, but the academic institutions that they founded. The mention of other research institutions, such as the Universities of Chicago and Virginia, allows us to recall entrepreneurial founders such as Rockefeller and Jefferson. It is appropriate then, to consider how university research - and in particular, the work product of the law schools - is faring before that court whose rulings most directly impact American innovation policy.

Judicial Review Before Marbury, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

While scholars have long probed the original understanding of judicial review and the early judicial review case law, this article presents a study of the judicial review case law in the United States before Marbury v. Madison that is dramatically more complete than prior work and that challenges previous scholarship on the original understanding of judicial review on the two most critical dimensions: how well judicial review was established at the time of the Founding and when it was exercised. Where prior work argues that judicial review was rarely exercised before Marbury (or that it was created in Marbury), …

Constitutionalization, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Students of constitutional law tend to suspect pretty early on that the Constitution simply means whatever the Supreme Court says that it means. Rather than fight that intuition, I think it is best to treat the student insight as one of the basic starting assumptions when teaching a course in Constitutional Law. The goal then becomes to help students figure out how best to maneuver and feel comfortable in a legal universe where the Constitution has only contingent meaning.

What the Supreme Court does when it clothes its political policy preferences in the garb of constitutional law can be described …

Altmann V. Austria And The Retroactivity Of The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Republic of Austria v. Altmann, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) generally applies to claims based on events that occurred before the Statute's enactment. To decide the retroactivity question, the Court had occasion to consider the essential nature of foreign sovereign immunity: is it merely a procedural immunity providing foreign states with present protection from the inconvenience and indignity of a lawsuit, or is it something more than that? The Court's examination of this question was brief and unsatisfying. Its analysis would have been enriched by a recognition that foreign …

Supreme Court Statistical Overview, October Term 2003, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute, Liz Hollander

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

Toward A New Constitutional Anatomy, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

There is an important sense in which our Constitution's structure is not what it appears to be--a set of activities or functions or geographies, the 'judicial" or the "executive" or the "legislative" power, the "truly local and the truly national. "Indeed, it is only if we put these notions to the side that we can come to grips with the importance of the generative provisions of the Constitution: the provisions that actually create our federal government; that bind citizens, through voting, to a House of Representatives, to a Senate, to a President, and even, indirectly, to a Supreme Court. In …

Sexual Orientation And The Paradox Of Heightened Scrutiny, Nan D. Hunter

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court performed a double move, creating a dramatic discursive moment: it both decriminalized consensual homosexual relations between adults, and, simultaneously, authorized a new regime of heightened regulation of homosexuality. How that happened and what we can expect next are the subjects of this essay.

Albert Einstein, Esq., Steven Goldberg

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Albert Einstein’s 1905 paper setting forth the special theory of relativity is one of the most famous scientific articles ever written. Peter Galison’s influential book, Einstein’s Clocks, Poincaré’s Maps: Empires of Time (2003), demonstrates that Einstein’s paper was fundamentally shaped by his work as a patent examiner by showing that arguments previously seen as abstract thought experiments were instead derived from Einstein’s work on patent applications for devices that coordinate clocks. Moving beyond Galison’s insights, we can see portions of Einstein’s paper as reflecting the quasi-judicial role of a patent examiner. Like trial judges, patent examiners must apply settled legal …

American Servicemembers' Protection Act Of 2002, Lilian V. Faulhaber

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

On July 1, 2002, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court ("ICC") entered into force, establishing the first permanent international criminal tribunal. Although seventy-six countries had ratified the Rome Statute by that date, the United States was not among them. Instead, Congress responded to the creation of the ICC by passing a bill sponsored by House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) that Republican legislators had been trying to get through the House and Senate for several years. On August 2, 2002, the American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2002 ("ASPA") became law. The Act was designed to prevent United States …

"Sir, Yes, Sir!": The Courts, Congress And Structural Injunctions, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This is a deeply confused book. Not that the authors' stance is unclear: They have seen federal courts in action, and they don't like what they see. Their subject is federal judicial supervision of state and local governments through injunctive decrees. The authors' position wouldn't be confused - or at least would be confused in a different way - if they dealt with injunctive decrees aimed at enforcing what the judges took to be constitutional requirements. In such cases there's at least something coherent that can be said about judges displacing democratic decision-making. Sandler and Schoenbrod, though, don't deal with …

Remarks Of Seth P. Waxman At The Memorial Observance For Justice Byron R. White, United States Supreme Court, Seth P. Waxman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Members of the Court, members of the family, and friends of Justice White- Alone among today's speakers, I met Justice White only late in his life. Growing up in the law, my relationship with him was the one many kids today have with Michael Jordan - I wanted to be "like White" -like the kind of man he was. I still have that aspiration. Like Byron White, I served in the Department of Justice and was altered forever by that honorable institution. And - like Justice White, in my own lesser way, I strove within the walls of this institution …

Constitutional Dignity And The Criminal Law, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Criminal law is important because it helps to define who we are as a constitutional democracy. There is much that distinguishes our form of government from others, but certainly much of that distinction is found in the Bill of Rights and in two simple words: due process. All of which help to affirm the value and sanctity of the individual in our society. Broadly then, criminal law helps to define who we are as a nation that values both order and liberty.

That is what many of the greatest judicial debates are about, like those involving Holmes, Hand, Jackson, and …

Brief Amicus Curiae Of The Idaho Conservation League And The Louisiana Environmental Action Network In Support Of Neither Side, Republican Party Of Minnesota V. Kelly, No. 01-521 (U.S. Jan. 17, 2002), John D. Echeverria

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Is The Rehnquist Court An "Activist" Court? The Commerce Cause Cases, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In United States v. Lopez, the Supreme Court, for the first time in sixty years, declared an act of Congress unconstitutional because Congress had exceeded its powers under the Commerce Clause. In 2000, the Court reaffirmed the stance it took in Lopez in the case of United States v. Morrison, once again finding that Congress had exceeded its powers. Are these examples of something properly called "judicial activism"? To answer this question, we must clarify the meaning of the term "judicial activism." With this meaning in hand, the author examines the Court's Commerce Clause cases. The answer he …

The Inside Scoop: What Federal Judges Really Think About The Way Lawyers Write, Kristen Konrad Robbins-Tiscione

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A recent survey indicates that what troubles federal judges most is not what lawyers say but what they fail to say when writing briefs. Although lawyers do a good job articulating legal issues and citing controlling, relevant legal authority, they are not doing enough with the law itself. Only fifty-six percent of the judges surveyed said that lawyers “always” or “usually” make their client’s best arguments. Fifty-eight percent of the judges rated the quality of the legal analysis as just “good,” as opposed to “excellent” or “very good.” The problem seems to be that briefs lack rigorous analysis, and the …

Treaties And The Eleventh Amendment, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's recent invigoration of federalism doctrine has revived a question that had long lain dormant in constitutional law: whether and to what extent federalism limits apply to exercises of the Treaty Power. In the days before the famous switch in time that saved nine, the Court in Missouri v. Holland upheld a statute passed by Congress to implement a treaty even though it assumed that the statute would exceed Congress's legislative power under Article I in the absence of the treaty. The significance of this holding abated considerably when the Court embraced a broader interpretation of the Commerce …

Celebrating The 200th Anniversary Of The Federal Courts Of The District Of Columbia, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

February 27, 2001 marked the 200th anniversary of the Federal Courts of the District of Columbia, the courts we know today as the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The history of these courts is interesting, albeit somewhat confusing; their names changed no fewer than six times since their creation. Indeed, from 1863 until 1893, the two courts were joined and called the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. Because of their location in the nation's capital and their unusual dual jurisdiction as both …

Judicial Nomination And Confirmation Process: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 107th Cong., Sept. 4, 2001 (Statement Of Mark V. Tushnet, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Mark V. Tushnet

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Listing And Delisting Processes Under The Endangered Species Act: Hearing Before The S. Subcomm. On Fisheries, Wildlife And Water, 107th Cong., May 9, 2001 (Statement Of John D. Echeverria, Dir. Environmental Policy Project, Geo. U. L. Center), John D. Echeverria

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

What's So Bad About Bush V. Gore? An Essay On Our Unsettled Election, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

There is a chance that Bush v. Gore may begin a process of laying a more attractive and realistic foundation for constitutionalism than the Official Story provides. The very fact that the Court is not politically independent and that it could not settle the matter in a disinterested, apolitical fashion might set us down a path toward a more mature version of constitutional law. The politically tendentious character of the Coon's reasoning demonstrates that our core constitutional commitments are subject to political manipulation. Ironically, public understanding of this malleability makes our politics more, rather than less, inclusive. It does so …

The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 1801, when William Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering Secretary of State James Madison to deliver his commission as justice of the peace, he initiated one of the most important cases in the Court's history. But why did Marbury choose the Supreme Court? Was there a lower federal court that could have granted the writ at the time? The short answer is "yes." Rather than making an unsuccessful attempt to invoke the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court, I have learned that he could have brought his suit in the then …

W(H)Ither Zschernig?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author argues here that a declaration of victory by the critics of the dormant foreign affairs doctrine would be premature. Notwithstanding the Court's citation of Ashwander v. TVA, the actual grounds of the decision in Crosby were in no meaningful sense less "constitutional" in nature than a decision based on the dormant foreign affairs power would have been. Moreover, even though the Court said that its decision was based on a straightforward application of "settled ... implied preemption doctrine," the Court's preemption analysis was anything but ordinary. Indeed, Crosby's version of preemption analysis is subject to the …

Dialogic Federalism: Constitutional Possibilities For Incorporation Of Human Rights Law In The United States, Catherine Powell

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Discussions about the allocation of authority between federal and subfederal systems in the implementation of international human rights law typically proceed by staking out one of two initial positions. At one end of the spectrum, a traditional constitutional theory takes a restrictive view of state and local authority, envisioning hierarchical imposition of federally implemented international law norms through the federal treaty power and determination of customary international law by federal courts. At the other end of the spectrum, a revisionist theory assumes greater fragmentation and authority reserved to the states based on federalism and separation of powers limits on federal …

Collusion And Collective Action In The Patent System: A Proposal For Patent Bounties, John R. Thomas

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Persistent commentary contends that the Patent Office is issuing patents that appropriate public domain concepts at an alarming frequency. Complaints of low patent quality enjoy growing resonance with regard to business methods, computer software, and other inventions for which patents were not traditionally sought. In this article, Professor Jay Thomas explains how the judiciary's lenient view of patentable subject matter and utility standards, along with miserly congressional funding policies, have rendered the Patent Office an increasingly porous agency. Professor Thomas next reviews existing proposals for improving patent quality, including the conventional wisdom that adoption of an opposition system will contribute …

Supplemental Brief Of Respondents Al Gore Jr. And Florida Democratic Party, Bush V. Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd., No. 00-836 (U.S. Nov. 30, 2000), Neal K. Katyal, Peter J. Rubin

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Reply Brief Of Respondents Al Gore, Jr., And Florida Democratic Party, George W. Bush V. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, No. 00-836 (U.S. Nov. 30, 2000), Neal K. Katyal, Peter J. Rubin

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.