Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Richmond (448)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (222)
- Seattle University School of Law (218)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (153)
- University of Michigan Law School (128)
-
- New York Law School (113)
- Pepperdine University (92)
- Duke Law (87)
- Roger Williams University (86)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (83)
- UIC School of Law (82)
- University of Colorado Law School (80)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (68)
- Georgetown University Law Center (62)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (60)
- Fordham Law School (51)
- University of Maine School of Law (48)
- University of Georgia School of Law (47)
- William & Mary Law School (47)
- BLR (46)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (43)
- American University Washington College of Law (41)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (33)
- Cornell University Law School (32)
- Washington University in St. Louis (31)
- St. Mary's University (30)
- Brooklyn Law School (28)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (27)
- Cleveland State University (26)
- Pace University (24)
- Keyword
-
- Judges (390)
- Courts (250)
- Supreme Court (236)
- Constitution (110)
- Judge (98)
-
- Judiciary (87)
- Federal courts (86)
- Court (85)
- Federal (76)
- United States Supreme Court (69)
- Jurisprudence (59)
- Constitutional law (58)
- Judicial review (56)
- Justice (56)
- Constitutional Law (55)
- Due process (54)
- New York (54)
- Law (51)
- Litigation (51)
- State (51)
- Congress (50)
- Jurisdiction (50)
- Judicial selection (47)
- Judicial process (46)
- Politics (45)
- Roger J Miner (44)
- Diversity (40)
- Court of Appeals (39)
- Defendant (39)
- Supreme court (38)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- University of Richmond Law Review (357)
- Seattle University Law Review (214)
- Faculty Scholarship (154)
- Touro Law Review (151)
- Indiana Law Journal (140)
-
- Law Faculty Publications (79)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (67)
- UIC Law Review (59)
- Pepperdine Law Review (57)
- Michigan Law Review (56)
- Life of the Law School (1993- ) (53)
- Articles (49)
- Faculty Publications (48)
- Northwestern University Law Review (47)
- ExpressO (43)
- Maine Law Review (43)
- Scholarly Works (41)
- Cardozo Law Review (37)
- Nevada Law Journal (34)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (32)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (32)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (31)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (28)
- Fordham Law Review (28)
- Committees (27)
- Faculty Articles (25)
- Scholarly Articles (24)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (23)
- American University Law Review (22)
- The Public Lands During the Remainder of the 20th Century: Planning, Law, and Policy in the Federal Land Agencies (Summer Conference, June 8-10) (22)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1681 - 1710 of 3133
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Issue 1: Annual Survey 2012 Table Of Contents
Issue 1: Annual Survey 2012 Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Step Aside, Mr. Senator: A Request For Members Of The Senate Judiciary Committee To Give Up Their Mics, Paul E. Vaglicia
Step Aside, Mr. Senator: A Request For Members Of The Senate Judiciary Committee To Give Up Their Mics, Paul E. Vaglicia
Indiana Law Journal
In 1995, a law professor at the University of Chicago Law School dubbed the Supreme Court confirmation hearings “vapid and hollow” and added that they, as implemented, “serve little educative function, except perhaps to reinforce lessons of cynicism that citizens often glean from government.” Ironically, this same law professor, Elena Kagan, later endured the confirmation hearings as a nominee and currently sits as the 112th Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. While she may be one of the few to ever reach a seat on the High Court, she is not alone in her assessment of the Supreme Court’s lackluster …
Mr. Justice Brandeis And The Art Of Judicial Dissent, Melvin I. Urofsky
Mr. Justice Brandeis And The Art Of Judicial Dissent, Melvin I. Urofsky
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Determining Notoriety In Supreme Court Decisions , G. Edward White
Determining Notoriety In Supreme Court Decisions , G. Edward White
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Explaining Korematsu: A Response To Dean Chemerinsky , Robert J. Pushaw Jr.
Explaining Korematsu: A Response To Dean Chemerinsky , Robert J. Pushaw Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Korematsu V. United States: A Tragedy Hopefully Never To Be Repeated , Erwin Chemerinsky
Korematsu V. United States: A Tragedy Hopefully Never To Be Repeated , Erwin Chemerinsky
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Redeeming Erie: A Response To Suzanna Sherry , Donald Earl Childress Iii
Redeeming Erie: A Response To Suzanna Sherry , Donald Earl Childress Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Wrong, Out Of Step, And Pernicious: Erie As The Worst Decision Of All Time, Suzanna Sherry
Wrong, Out Of Step, And Pernicious: Erie As The Worst Decision Of All Time, Suzanna Sherry
Pepperdine Law Review
This essay was written for “Supreme Mistakes: Exploring the Most Maligned Decisions in Supreme Court History.” A symposium on the worst Supreme Court decision of all time risks becoming an exercise best described by Claude Rains’s memorable line in Casablanca: “Round up the usual suspects.” Two things saved this symposium from that fate. First, each of the usual suspects was appointed defense counsel, which made things more interesting. Second, a new face found its way into the line-up: Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. My goal in this essay is to explain why Erie is in fact guiltier than all of the …
Putting Buck V. Bell In Scientific And Historical Context: A Response To Victoria Nourse , Edward J. Larson
Putting Buck V. Bell In Scientific And Historical Context: A Response To Victoria Nourse , Edward J. Larson
Pepperdine Law Review
In this article written for a law-review symposium in response to a presentation on the infamous 1927 U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Buck v. Bell, Edward J. Larson argues that, at the time that the case was decided, eugenics was on the incline, not the decline. In the 1920s, the American scientific and medical community broadly backed eugenic remedies for various forms of mental illness and retardation. Legislatures, lawyers, and jurists took their cue from this scientific and medical consensus. Absent any question that the statute at issue in Buck v. Bell was validly passed by the Virginia legislature or …
Buck V. Bell: A Constitutional Tragedy From A Lost World, Victoria Nourse
Buck V. Bell: A Constitutional Tragedy From A Lost World, Victoria Nourse
Pepperdine Law Review
The article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell, which dealt with the forced sterilization of people deemed unfit, such as intellectually disabled or mentally retarded individuals. Topics include the enforceability of unconstitutional judicial decisions, eugenic sterilization, and the application of substantive due process.
A Reluctant Apology For Plessy: A Response To Akhil Amar, Barry P. Mcdonald
A Reluctant Apology For Plessy: A Response To Akhil Amar, Barry P. Mcdonald
Pepperdine Law Review
A response to the article "Plessy v. Ferguson and the Anti-Canon," by Akhil Amar, published in the November 2011 issue of the "Pepperdine Law Review," is presented. Topics include an examination of Justice Henry Billings Brown's decision in the case, the constitutionality of segregating U.S. citizens by race, and the impact of public opinion on U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
Plessy V. Ferguson And The Anti-Canon, Akhil Reed Amar
Plessy V. Ferguson And The Anti-Canon, Akhil Reed Amar
Pepperdine Law Review
The article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson, which dealt with the constitutionality of racial segregation in the U.S. Topics include the application of precedent in controversial U.S. Supreme Court cases, when the U.S. Constitution can overrule a court decision, and dissenting judicial opinions.
Coming To Terms With Dred Scott: A Response To Daniel A. Farber, Paul Finkelman
Coming To Terms With Dred Scott: A Response To Daniel A. Farber, Paul Finkelman
Pepperdine Law Review
When thinking about Dred Scott, the issue is not how do we “rehabilitate” the opinion. The goal of scholarship here is to understand the opinion, place it in the context of its own time, and explain its enduring significance. After that, we may praise or damn it, and rehabilitate it or condemn it. No one today likes the Dred Scott opinion or the result. But, this article argues that Professor Daniel A. Farber is so incensed by the opinion that he vastly overstates its historical significance including incorrectly blaming Chief Justice Taney for causing the Civil War. This article rejects …
Anti-Canonical Considerations, Edward J. Larson
Anti-Canonical Considerations, Edward J. Larson
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Stare Decisis In The Inferior Courts Of The United States, Joseph Mead
Stare Decisis In The Inferior Courts Of The United States, Joseph Mead
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
While circuit courts are bound to fallow circuit precedent under "law of the circuit" the practice among federal district courts is more varied and uncertain, routinely involving little or no deference to their own precedent. I argue that the different hierarchical levels and institutional characteristics do not account for the differences in practices between circuit and district courts. Rather, district courts can and should adopt a "law of the district" similar to that of circuit courts. Through this narrow proposal, I explore the historical stare decisis practices in federal courts that are not Supreme.
Building The Federal Judiciary (Literally And Legally): The Monuments Of Chief Justices Taft, Warren And Rehnquist, Judith Resnik
Building The Federal Judiciary (Literally And Legally): The Monuments Of Chief Justices Taft, Warren And Rehnquist, Judith Resnik
Indiana Law Journal
The “federal courts” took on their now familiar contours over the course of the twentieth century. Three chief justices—William Howard Taft, Earl Warren, and William Rehnquist—played pivotal roles in shaping the institutional, jurisprudential, and physical premises. Taft is well known for promoting a building to house the U.S. Supreme Court and for launching the administrative infrastructure that came to govern the federal courts. Earl Warren’s name has become the shorthand for a jurisprudential shift from state toward federal authority; the Warren Court offered an expansive understanding of the role federal courts could play in enabling access for a host of …
Two Cheers For The Constitution Of The United States: A Response To Professor Lee J. Strang, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Two Cheers For The Constitution Of The United States: A Response To Professor Lee J. Strang, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Working Paper Series
This article is an invited response to Professor Lee Strang’s article Originalism and the Aristotelian Tradition: Virtue’s Home in Originalism, 80 Fordham L. Rev. 1997 (2012). Strang defends original public meaning originalism from a virtue theoretic perspective that he traces to the “central Western tradition” and ultimately to Aristotle. I reply that those committed to that tradition do better (1) to reject original pubic meaning originalism, (2) to embrace some version of original intent originalism, and (3) to defend the original intent meaning of the U.S. Constitution only with important reservations and on certain conditions. The original sin of …
The Supreme Court’S Regulation Of Civil Procedure: Lessons From Administrative Law, Lumen N. Mulligan, Glen Staszewski
The Supreme Court’S Regulation Of Civil Procedure: Lessons From Administrative Law, Lumen N. Mulligan, Glen Staszewski
Faculty Works
In this Article, we argue that the Supreme Court should route most Federal Rules of Civil Procedure issues through the notice-and-comment rulemaking process of the Civil Rules Advisory Committee instead of issuing judgments in adjudications, unless the case can be resolved solely through the deployment of traditional tools of statutory construction. While we are not the first to express a preference for rulemaking on civil procedure issues, we advance the position in four significant ways. First, we argue that the Supreme Court in the civil procedure arena is vested with powers analogous to most administrative agencies. Second, building upon this …
Bush V. Gore: The Worst (Or At Least Second-To-The-Worst) Supreme Court Decision Ever, Mark S. Brodin
Bush V. Gore: The Worst (Or At Least Second-To-The-Worst) Supreme Court Decision Ever, Mark S. Brodin
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Congress, The Constitution, And Supreme Court Recusal, Louis J. Virelli Iii
Congress, The Constitution, And Supreme Court Recusal, Louis J. Virelli Iii
Washington and Lee Law Review
Recusal is one of the most hotly contested issues facing the Supreme Court. From the wide-ranging debate over Supreme Court recusal, however, a singular theme has emerged: Congress must do more to protect the integrity and legitimacy of the Court by regulating the Justices’ recusal practices. Herein lies the problem. Rather than solve the puzzle of Supreme Court recusal, direct congressional regulation has created an impasse between Congress and the Court that has consequences for the reputation, efficacy, and legitimacy of both Branches. In a precursor to this Article, I recast the issue of Supreme Court recusal as a constitutional …
The Worst Supreme Court Case Ever? Identifying, Assessing, And Exploring Low Moments Of The High Court, Jeffrey W. Stempel
The Worst Supreme Court Case Ever? Identifying, Assessing, And Exploring Low Moments Of The High Court, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Naim V. Naim, Richard Delgado
Terrace V. Thompson And The Legacy Of Manifest Destiny, Jean Stefancic
Terrace V. Thompson And The Legacy Of Manifest Destiny, Jean Stefancic
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. V. Shute: The Titanic Of Worst Decisions, Linda S. Mullenix
Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. V. Shute: The Titanic Of Worst Decisions, Linda S. Mullenix
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Contract Law Walks The Plank: Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. V. Shute, Charles L. Knapp
Contract Law Walks The Plank: Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. V. Shute, Charles L. Knapp
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Ashcroft V. Iqbal: Contempt For Rules, Statutes, The Constitution, And Elemental Fairness, Steve Subrin
Ashcroft V. Iqbal: Contempt For Rules, Statutes, The Constitution, And Elemental Fairness, Steve Subrin
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Hustler V. Falwell: Worst Case In The History Of The World, Maybe The Universe, John M. Kang
Hustler V. Falwell: Worst Case In The History Of The World, Maybe The Universe, John M. Kang
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Lassiter V. Department Of Social Services: Why Is It Such A Lousy Case?, Brooke D. Coleman
Lassiter V. Department Of Social Services: Why Is It Such A Lousy Case?, Brooke D. Coleman
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
On Teaching Conflicts And Why I Dislike Allstate Insurance Co. V. Hague, Thomas O. Main
On Teaching Conflicts And Why I Dislike Allstate Insurance Co. V. Hague, Thomas O. Main
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.