Judges Commons^™

Dobbs V. Brown, Benjamin H. Barton

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization1is the most important and impactful Supreme Court decision since at least Roe v. Wade, and potentially since Brown v. Board of Education. Past survey data show that most Americans can only name two Supreme Court opinions: Roe and Brown. Dobbs will surely join that list. This Article compares the history, drafting, and opinions of Dobbs and Brown to show what a missed opportunity Dobbs represents. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the opinion, it should be clear that Dobbs was one of those unique times (like that of Brown) where the Court …

Structuring The President’S Removal Power: An Agency-Specific Approach, Peter Margulies

American University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions have taken a broad view of the President’s power to remove executive branch officials. According to the Court, the President’s Article II obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” generally requires that the President have authority to remove officials at will. The Court has thus far declined to overrule Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision upholding “forcause” restrictions on removal for multi-member “quasi-judicial” bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Nonetheless, recent Court decisions have eroded the rationale in the earlier case, which has received additional attention because of efforts …

Variable Standards: How Many Uninjured Class Members Are Acceptable?, Tom Flesher

Touro Law Review

Purchasers of canned tuna filed a class action against tuna producers after a price-fixing scheme raised prices above competitive levels. To be certified, a class must include only members who have suffered an injury, in this case by paying a higher price than they would have in the absence of price-fixing, but it was difficult to identify which plaintiffs were uninjured and should be excluded. Dueling statistical models failed to resolve this uncertainty, with one model suggesting up to one in every three class members was not injured at all. The Ninth Circuit nonetheless allowed this class to be certified, …

On Guido Calabresi, Roger K. Newman

Touro Law Review

Few individuals have had as long and as influential a career in law as Guido Calabresi. Cofounder of the field of law and economics, teacher, dean, and judge, he has inspired (and infuriated) multitudes. On the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where he has served for thirty years (while continuing to teach until recently), his creativity and doctrinal innovations continue apace. He has urged the academy, legislature, and bench alike to engage in continuing conversation to improve the law and its effect upon those to whom it acts. One of these areas is certification—the practice of …

Lessons Learned From The Trump Rule Of Law Stress Test: Beware Bad Faith Actors, Brian Z. Tamanaha

Scholarship@WashULaw

The second Trump Administration has engaged in a vast swath of actions that press against the outer boundaries of legality. These actions provide a unique opportunity to identify potential vulnerabilities and expose how the rule of law can be undermined. While I will elucidate well-known points along the way, my primary aim is to bring out aspects of the rule of law that usually go unnoticed or under the radar. After setting out basic aspects of the rule of law, I cover three topics: 1) adhering to the truth, 2) pretextual arguments, and 3) flooding the field with actions and …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Voting Matters: Materiality Considerations And The Shareholder Vote, Renee M. Jones

Seattle University Law Review

For the shareholder franchise to have meaning, shareholders must have access to relevant information to inform their voting decisions. The securities laws’ disclosure requirements play an essential role in informing the shareholder vote.

This Essay focuses on the question of the materiality of information in the context of shareholder voting. It addresses the question of whether ESG-related information is material, positioning the materiality inquiry within the context of shareholders’ voting decisions. It explores the definition of materiality with a focus on the “reasonable investor” concept embedded within the definition. The Essay argues that the implicit expectations of many commentators that …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Understanding The Big Three’S Wavering Support Of Environmental And Social Shareholder Proposals, Jeff Schwartz, Jefferson Jensen

Seattle University Law Review

Because of their substantial equity portfolios, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street (the Big 3) are central players in corporate governance. It is, therefore, critical to understand how they vote. One puzzle is that their support for shareholder proposals on environmental and social matters appears to waiver. In 2020, for instance, BlackRock supported 11.1% of environmental proposals at S&P 500 firms. In 2021, it seemingly reversed course, supporting 55.2%. It then flipped again, supporting 32.1% in 2022. Such statistics suggest that the Big 3 are constantly changing their views on these topics. This Article seeks to better understand whether this is …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

The Inadequacy Of Perpetuating Vestiges Of Segregation In K-12 Curriculum: The Justiciability Of Reviewing Duties To Adequacy In Florida's Education Clause, Soumya Sreerama

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Although the Supreme Court declared segregation the most abusive affront to education and ruled to eliminate vestiges of segregation “root and branch,” those same roots have grown unchecked to remain prominent today. One of the undercurrents of state-sponsored discrimination that has escaped desegregation remedies is the skewed, whitewashed curriculum that permeated K-12 classrooms in Jim Crow America. More troubling, is that those vestiges of an inadequately biased curriculum are still slithering in students’ courses today. Although student movements and education reformists have attempted to counter skewed curricula by supplementing them with separate ethnic studies courses, states like Florida recently passed …

Electing The Supreme Court, Dmitry Bam

FIU Law Review

There is a curious irony in how we select United States Supreme Court justices. According to basic constitutional theory, as well as the arguments made by many leading Framers at the time of the Founding, one of the Court’s primary roles is to serve as a check on the executive and legislative branches when they exceed the constitutional limits imposed by the American people. Yet, we ask those very branches to jointly select the justices responsible for enforcing these limits, leaving the American people with only an indirect (if any) role in the process. Not surprisingly, the justices nominated by …

Doubting Thomas And Questioning Stare Decisis Under The Roberts Court, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

Articles

The article critically examines the erosion of stare decisis under the Roberts Court, highlighting concerns about the Supreme Court's increasing willingness to overturn established precedents. While acknowledging the importance of stare decisis in maintaining stability and equality, the author argues that its practical value is being undermined by ideological polarization and a departure from traditional legal reasoning. The article questions the Court's recent approach to precedent, particularly in cases like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and critiques the conservative majority's aggressive use of judicial power.

A Conversation With Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Brett M. Kavanaugh, J. Joel Alicea

Catholic University Law Review

On Thursday, September 26th, 2024, the Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition at The Catholic University of America hosted a conversation between Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and Professor J. Joel Alicea. This was the inaugural event of the new Center. The conversation covered topics such as constitutional interpretation, the separation of powers, religious liberty, and the Catholic intellectual tradition. This is a transcript of the conversation, and the text appears substantially as it was delivered. The video of the event may be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sKvSwzkmqo.

The Search For Unenumerated Fundamental Rights, Alina Sluzhyvenkova

Student Theses and Dissertations

There are certain rights that are explicitly enumerated in the Constitution, e.g., right to bear arms, right to free speech, right to a speedy and public trial. There are also rights that aren’t specifically written out but are nevertheless enjoyed by people nationwide. Rights that aren’t explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but which are fundamental to are called the unenumerated rights. Unenumerated rights are just as important and can be derived from natural law, enumerated rights, the Ninth Amendment, precedents, judicial opinions, and substantive due process.

Substantive due process is a principle guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which …

The Lost History Of Judicial Restraint, Derek A. Webb

Notre Dame Law Review

For over 125 years, jurists and scholars who have championed judicial restraint have looked back to James Bradley Thayer’s 1893 Harvard Law Review article, The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law, as the seminal authority for the rule that courts should presume the constitutionality of a challenged law and only invalidate it if its unconstitutionality is “clear” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But Thayer presented those three rules (presumption of constitutionality, clear error rule, and reasonable doubt standard) as rooted in historical legal practice in America. And yet none of his twentieth or twenty-first century …

A Fundamental Failing: The Mississippi Judiciary's Abrogation Of Its Constitutional Duty, Brad Robertson

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Legally Magic" Words: An Empirical Study Of The Accessibility Of Fifth Amendment Rights, Roseanna Sommers, Kate Weisburd

Northwestern University Law Review

Fifth Amendment case law (including Miranda v. Arizona) requires that individuals assert their right to counsel or silence using “explicit,” “clear,” and “unambiguous” statements—or, as some dissenting judges have lamented, using “legally magic” words. Through a survey of 1,718 members of the U.S. public, we investigate what ordinary people believe it takes to assert the right to counsel and the right to silence. We then compare their perceptions against prevailing legal standards governing invocation.

With respect to the right to counsel, the survey results indicate that members of the public have a uniformly lower threshold for invocation than do …

Book Review: John Paul Stevens, The Making Of A Justice: Reflections On My First 94 Years, New York, Little, Brown And Co., 2019, Pp. 549, $35.00 (Hardback), Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The autobiography of Justice John Paul Stevens, published just a few months before he died, is an enticing travelogue for Supreme Court nerds. Other travelers may want to pick a different landscape.

Popularity Contest: Is An Independent Judiciary Compatible With Popular Constitutionalism?, Lulu S. Faulk

Indiana Law Journal

Can the theory of popular constitutionalism—where the people have authority to shape constitutional law—exist alongside judicial independence? On the surface, these two ideas seem like contestants in a popularity contest: Popular constitutionalism embraces the will of the people in defining constitutional law, while judicial independence insists that judges disregard any and all external pressure in an effort to uphold the tenets of the Constitution even when they are unpopular. The contrast of these competing ideas is all the more evident with recent Supreme Court decisions such as Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, demonstrating a deviation from majority opinion in …

Contempt: The Original Judicial Cheat Code, Ryan L. Scott

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The judicial contempt power challenges the fundamental rights enshrined in America’s Constitution. Imagine spending eight years in federal prison with no right to a jury trial or a court appointed attorney. Your only reprieve is the discretion of the judge who is imprisoning you. Meaningful appeals and even habeas corpus actions are generally not available remedies. Instead, what was originally justified as an inherent power of the court, necessary to maintain order and decorum, is increasingly used for trivial offenses or to incarcerate individuals for far longer than their possible crimes would otherwise warrant.

Despite widespread instances of abuse of …

Judicial Preview Oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi Sebagai Upaya Preventif Perlindungan Hak Konstitusional (Studi Komperasi Dengan Mahkamah Konstitusi Chili), Elisabeth Sihaloho, Fifiana Wisnaeni

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The existence of the Constitutional Court as stated in the provisions of Article 24C of the 1945 Constitution has established the dignity of the Constitutional Court's position as a Guardian of the Constitution which is understood as a judicial institution that protects the constitutional rights of Indonesia citizens. This research is aimed at solving the problem of the constitutional rights of Indonesia citizens who are often injured through legal products in the form of laws. Therefore, this study focuses on studying, analyzing and comparing how the context of judicial preview or can be understood as a test of a draft …

Prudence, Role Morality, And Restraint: Judge Wilkinson On The Separation Of Powers, Katherine Mims Crocker, Jack Goldsmith

Faculty Scholarship

Caution in reviewing the actions of the legislative and executive branches has been a hallmark of the jurisprudence of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III. The Constitution “at most gives judges specific authority to redress violations of specific provisions,” Judge Wilkinson writes in his book Cosmic Constitutional Theory. But even when doing so, “courts must exercise great caution before injecting themselves into the vortex of varied political questions,” for “[i]t is often far preferable to allow the political institutions under our Constitution to struggle among themselves, with each bringing to bear the respective arsenal of powers the Framers accorded them.” …

University Of The District Of Columbia Law Review, University Of The District Of Columbia Law Review

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

On Responsive Judging, Rosalind Dixon

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Rwu School Of Law Social Justice Camp, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

First Amendment And Media Law Diversity Moot Court Competition, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Michelle Choate

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Egypt’S Legal Modernism: Challenging The National Discourse, Mohamed A. El-Deeb

Theses and Dissertations

Egypt’s legal modernity is the story of the modern Egyptian state itself. Reforming the country’s judiciary in the late nineteenth century was meant to achieve ambitious aims beyond the functionality of a justice system. The utmost goal was the country’s independence from the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire. The judicial reforms modernized the Egyptian state and built a judiciary and legal community like no other place. Egypt achieved its independent judiciary before gaining its political independence. That was a remarkable achievement of the judicial reform. That rich part of Egypt’s modern history is negated and disregarded from public awareness. Not …

A Botched Procedure For Removing A High Court Judge: A Critique Of Joshua Ndipyola Banda V Attorney General 2022/Ccz/0010, O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

The judiciary performs a key role in implementing the constitution and safeguarding constitutional order. Democracy cannot thrive when the judiciary is pliant. An independent judiciary is fundamental to constitutional democracy. Not only should judges be appointed in a transparent and credible manner, but their removal should insulate the judiciary from potential reprisals. Certainly, incompetent, and professionally unfit judges should have no place in the judiciary and judges who grossly misconduct themselves should be held accountable and in extreme cases, must be removed from office. However, how judges are removed has an impact on the autonomy of the judiciary. If the …

Sangwa V Attorney General And Law Association Of Zambia (2021 /Ccz/0012) [2023] Zmcc 6 (31 July 2023), Hope Sthembile Homela, Robert Farbman, J. P. Swenson

SAIPAR Case Review

This case underscores the critical need for the judiciary to assert its financial independence, ensuring that its budget and resources are not subject to undue influence or control by the executive. In this landmark ruling, the Constitutional Court missed an important opportunity to set a stronger precedent for the autonomy of the judiciary by not fully addressing the constitutional violations at hand relating to the financial independence of the judiciary. The Court’s decision, while acknowledging the issue of financial independence, failed to provide a decisive remedy to protect the judiciary from the continuing risk of executive interference. Recognizing the necessity …