Judges Commons^™

When Courts Run Amuck: A Book Review Of Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law By Sandra F. Sperino And Suja A. Thomas (Oxford 2017), Theresa M. Beiner

Texas A&M Law Review

In Unequal: How America’s Courts Undermine Discrimination Law (“Unequal”), law professors Sandra F. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas provide a point-by-point analysis of how the federal courts’ interpretations of federal anti-discrimination laws have undermined their efficacy to provide relief to workers whose employers have allegedly engaged in discrimination. The cases’ results are consistently pro-employer, even while the Supreme Court of the United States—a court not known for being particularly pro-plaintiff—has occasionally ruled in favor of plaintiff employees. The authors suggest some reasons for this apparent anti-plaintiff bias among the federal courts, although they do not settle on a particular reason …

Reconsidering Selective Conscientious Objection, Andrew J. Haile

University of Richmond Law Review

In 1971, in the midst of the Vietnam War, the United States Supreme Court decided that to qualify as a conscientious objector (“CO”) one must oppose all war, and not just a particular war. The Court’s decision in Gillette v. United States turned on its interpretation of section 6(j) of the Military Selective Service Act. Section 6(j) provided, in relevant part, that no person shall “be subject to combatant training and service in the armed forces of the United States who, by reason of religious training and belief, is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form.” According to …

Nothing New Under The Sun: The Law-Politics Dynamic In Supreme Court Decision Making, Stephen M. Feldman

Pepperdine Law Review

Recent events have seemed to inject politics into American judicial institutions. As a result, many observers worry that the Supreme Court, in particular, has become politicized. According to this view, the Justices should decide cases in accordance with the rule of law and be unmoved by political concerns. These worries arise from a mistaken assumption: that law and politics can be separate and independent in the process of judicial decision making. But at the Supreme Court (as well as in the lower courts, for that matter), decision making arises from a law-politics dynamic. Adjudication in accord with a pure rule …

Constitutional Preservation And The Judicial Review Of Partisan Gerrymanders, Edward B. Foley

Georgia Law Review

This Essay makes three contributions to the debate
over whether the Constitution contains a judicially
enforceable constrain on gerrymanders. First,it directly
tackles the Chief Justice'sfear of thejudiciaryappearing
partisan,observing that the same fear would exist if the
Constitution explicitly banned gerrymanders and
explaining why an implicit ban should be no less
judicially enforceable than an explicit ban under
Marbury v. Madison. Second, invoking the idea of
"institutional forbearance" in the important new book
How Democracies Die, the Essay shows how the
Elections Clause can be construed to protect
congressional districting from abuses of legislative
discretion committed by state legislatures. Together,
these …

Substantive Due Process And The Politicization Of The Supreme Court, Eric Millman

CMC Senior Theses

Substantive due process is one of the most cherished and elusive doctrines in American constitutional jurisprudence. The understanding that the Constitution of the United States protects not only specifically enumerated rights, but also broad concepts such as “liberty,” “property,” and “privacy,” forms the foundation for some of the Supreme Court’s most impactful—and controversial—decisions.

This thesis explores the constitutional merits and politicizing history of natural rights jurisprudence from its application in Dred Scott v. Sandford to its recent evocation in Obergefell v. Hodges. Indeed, from slavery to same-same sex marriage, substantive due process has played a pivotal role in shaping …

Twitter And The #So-Calledjudge, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

SMU Law Review

Two-hundred-eighty characters may be insufficient to deliver a treatise on the judiciary, but it is more than enough to deliver criticism of the third branch of government. Today, these tweeted critiques sometimes come not from the general public but from the President himself. Attacks such as these come at a challenging time for court systems. We live in a highly politicized, polarized society. This polarization is reflected in attitudes toward the courts, particularly the federal courts. Unfortunately, public doubts about the court system come at a time when public understanding of the structure of government, and especially the court system, …

Justice As Fair Division, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

The current hyperpoliticization of the Court grows out of a feedback loop between politicized appointments and politicized decision-making. This Article suggests a change in the internal procedures by which the Court hears and decides particular cases. A three-Justice panel hears and decides each case. Appeal to an en banc sitting of the entire Court would require a unanimous vote of all non-recused Justices. This Article explores several possible approaches in selecting the three-Justice panel. This Article proposes that applying a fair division scheme to the Court's decision-making process might act to reverse this loop and work to depoliticize the Court …

Learning To Live With Judicial Partisanship: A Response To Cassandra Burke Robertson, Bruce A. Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Learning To Live With Judicial Partisanship: A Response To Cassandra Burke Robertson, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

The Senate Blue-Slip Process As It Bears On Proposals To Split The Ninth Circuit, Wyatt Kozinski

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.

Unprecedented? Judicial Confirmation Battles And The Search For A Usable Past, Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Recent years have seen intense conflicts over federal judicial appointments, culminating in Senate Republicans' 2016 refusal to consider the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats' 2017 filibuster of Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the same seat, and Republicans' triggering of the "nuclear option" to confirm Gorsuch. At every stage in this process, political actors on both sides have accused one another of "unprecedented" behavior.

This Essay, written for the 2017 Supreme Court issue of the Harvard Law Review, examines these disputes and their histories, with an eye toward understanding the ways in which discussions of (un)precedentedness …

Frank Morey Coffin's Political Years: Prelude To A Judgeship, Donald E. Nicoll

Maine Law Review

Each day when I go to my study, I see a wood block print of two owls gazing at me with unblinking eyes. Ever alert, they remind me of the artist, who in his neat, fine hand, titled the print “Deux Hiboux,” inscribed it to the recipients and signed it simply “FMC 8-2-87.” In addition to his talents as an artist and friend in all seasons, FMC was a remarkable public servant in all three branches of the federal government and, with his friend and colleague Edmund S. Muskie, a creative political reformer for the State of Maine. Throughout his …

Introduction To Section Vi: Understanding And Improving Our Judicial System, Hanna Borsilli

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Justice Blackmun And Individual Rights, Diane P. Wood

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Of the many contributions Justice Blackmun has made to American jurisprudence, surely his record in the area of individual rights stands out for its importance. Throughout his career on the Supreme Court, he has displayed concern for a wide variety of individual and civil rights. He has rendered decisions on matters ranging from the most personal interests in autonomy and freedom from interference from government in life’s private realms, to the increasingly complex problems posed by discrimination based upon race, sex, national origin, alienage, illegitimacy, sexual orientation, and other characteristics. As his views have become well known to the public, …

Newsroom: Governor Raimondo On Rwu Law 09-19-2017, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Core Case For Weak-Form Judicial Review, Rosalind Dixon

Cardozo Law Review

This Article contributes to debates over the democratic desirability of judicial review, by stating a quasi-general case for the desirability of judicial review that is "weak"-or broad but non-final-rather than "strong"-form in nature. Judicial review of this kind, the article argues, can help counter blockages in the legislative process-such as legislative "blind spots" and "burdens of inertia"-that can otherwise impair the enjoyment of individual rights even of a kind recognized by democratic majorities. This, the Article suggests, provides an important, if contingent, outcome-based case in favor of courts exercising powers of weak-form review. The case for weak judicial review of …

Tailored Judicial Selection, Dmitry Bam

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of Popular Elections, Former Justice Robert L. Brown

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Elections And Issue Advertising: A Two-State Study, Christopher Terry, Mitchell T. Bard

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Living With Judicial Elections, Raymond J. Mckoski

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Putting Equality To A Vote: Individual Rights, Judicial Elections, And The Arkansas Supreme Court, Billy Corriher

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Why Amending The Consitution To Overrule Citizens United Is The Wrong Way To Fix Campaign Finance In The United States, Zachary Hale

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enhanced Campaing Finance Disclosure And Recusal Rules To Offset The Influence Of Dark Money In State Supreme Court Elections, Cathy R. Silak, Emily Siess Donnellan

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

It Can't Wait: Exposing The Connections Between Forms Of Sexual Exploitation, Dawn Hawkins

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Injustice Under Law: Perpetuating And Criminalizing Poverty Through The Courts, Judge Lisa Foster

Georgia State University Law Review

Money matters in the justice system. If you can afford to purchase your freedom pretrial, if you can afford to immediately pay fines and fees for minor traffic offenses and municipal code violations, if you can afford to hire an attorney, your experience of the justice system both procedurally and substantively will be qualitatively different than the experience of someone who is poor. More disturbingly, through a variety of policies and practices—some of them blatantly unconstitutional—our courts are perpetuating and criminalizing poverty. And when we talk about poverty in the United States, we are still talking about race, ethnicity, and …

Some Thoughts Raised By Magna Carta: The Popular Re-Election Of Judges, W. Hamilton Bryson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judge Posner's Road Map For Convention Against Torture Claims When Central American Governments Cannot Protect Citizens Against Gang Violence, Steven H. Schulman

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

The Supreme Court’S Countermajoritarianism? What Impact Does Public Opinion Have On The Supreme Court Decisions?, Evan Tompkins

Political Science Theses and Capstones

Although normative questions about the role of the Supreme Court as a countermajoritarian institution have been commonly debated in political science research, an updated empirical question on Mishler and Sheehan’s (1993), study on public opinion and its impact on the Court must be asked. It has been 25 years since the publication of their study and numerous high profile cases such as Bush v. Gore, Citizens United v. FEC, and Obergefell v. Hodges have brought nationwide attention to the Supreme Court and how it interacts with public opinion. Results from empirical measurements of the Supreme Court’s decisions and what impact …

Emerging Constitutional Conflicts And The Role Of Courts, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "When a court exercises judicial review, it tells Congress, the executive branch or a state to refrain from action that is under way or to take some action that is not being taken. Either way, a democratically accountable institution is told that it cannot do what the people (presumably) want it to do, or that it must do what the people (presumably) do not want it to do."