Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Richmond (347)
- University of Michigan Law School (316)
- Seattle University School of Law (213)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (206)
- Universitas Indonesia (121)
-
- William & Mary Law School (80)
- Notre Dame Law School (69)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (35)
- University of Colorado Law School (35)
- Cleveland State University (31)
- St. Mary's University (30)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (29)
- American University Washington College of Law (27)
- Fordham Law School (26)
- Brooklyn Law School (24)
- Emory University School of Law (23)
- UIC School of Law (23)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (22)
- University of Georgia School of Law (22)
- Georgetown University Law Center (21)
- Boston University School of Law (20)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (17)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (15)
- Roger Williams University (15)
- Pepperdine University (14)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (14)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (13)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (13)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (12)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (11)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (337)
- Supreme Court (258)
- Constitution (189)
- Federal (120)
- State (98)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (90)
- Courts (82)
- New York (82)
- Congress (76)
- Federal courts (66)
- Defendant (63)
- Due process (60)
- Judicial review (59)
- Court of Appeals (57)
- 1990) (55)
- Discrimination (55)
- Sixth Amendment (49)
- First Amendment (48)
- § 6 (47)
- Appellate Division (46)
- N.Y. Cont. Art. I (40)
- Court (39)
- Federalism (38)
- Law reform (37)
- SCOTUS (37)
- 1991) (36)
- Constitutional law (36)
- Police (36)
- Judges (35)
- Separation of powers (34)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- University of Richmond Law Review (330)
- Seattle University Law Review (212)
- Touro Law Review (198)
- Articles (164)
- "Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI (121)
-
- Michigan Law Review (93)
- Court Briefs (60)
- Faculty Scholarship (55)
- Faculty Publications (47)
- Publications (35)
- Northwestern University Law Review (31)
- Faculty Articles (29)
- Scholarly Articles (22)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (20)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (18)
- William & Mary Law Review (18)
- Cleveland State Law Review (17)
- Fordham Law Review (17)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (17)
- UIC Law Review (15)
- American University Law Review (14)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (14)
- Pepperdine Law Review (13)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (13)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (11)
- Law Student Publications (11)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (11)
- Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - ) (11)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (11)
- All Faculty Scholarship (10)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1981 - 2010 of 2053
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Comment On: State V. Clifton Pearce, James Hinton Pou Bailey
Comment On: State V. Clifton Pearce, James Hinton Pou Bailey
North Carolina Central Law Review
No abstract provided.
Review Of Concerning Dissent And Civil Disobedience, By A. Fortas, Terrance Sandalow
Review Of Concerning Dissent And Civil Disobedience, By A. Fortas, Terrance Sandalow
Reviews
Noah Chomsky has written of Justice Fortas' essay that it "is not serious enough for extended discussion." It would be a mistake to dismiss the essay so lightly. The prestige of Justice Fortas' office almost inevitably will gain for the essay an audience it would not otherwise have had, among whom will be those who will confuse the office with the argument. For some this confusion will insulate the argument from criticism. For others it will tarnish the office.
Federal Removal And Injunction To Protect Political Expression And Racial Equality: A Proposed Change, Christopher B. Mueller
Federal Removal And Injunction To Protect Political Expression And Racial Equality: A Proposed Change, Christopher B. Mueller
Publications
No abstract provided.
Review Of Labor And The Legal Process, By H. H. Wellington, Theodore J. St. Antoine
Review Of Labor And The Legal Process, By H. H. Wellington, Theodore J. St. Antoine
Reviews
If there is a more acute intellect than that of Harry Wellington at work today in labor law, I am unaware of it. This makes his new book all the more troubling, for it reveals the limitations, or perhaps I should even say the deficiencies, of a highly rational approach to the regulation of industrial relations. Professor Wellington has two stated objectives (he disclaims any attempt at a comprehensive text on labor law). First, he wishes to appraise "the role of the legal process in moving collective bargaining to its present position at the center of national labor policy." Second, …
Book Review Of The Warren Court, William F. Swindler
Book Review Of The Warren Court, William F. Swindler
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Brief Amicus Curiae, Urging Reversal, On Behalf Of - John J. Russell, Bishop Of Richmond; Lawrence Cardinal Shehan, Archbishop Of Baltimore; Paul A. Hallinan, Archbishop Of Atlanta; Philip M. Hannan, Archbishop Of New Orleans; Robert E. Lucey, Archbishop Of San Antonio; Joseph B. Brunini, Apostolic Administrator Of Natchez-Jackson; Lawrence M. Defalco, Bishop Of Amarillo; Joseph A. Dirick, Apostolic Administrator Of Nashville; Thomas K. Gorman, Bishop Of Dallas-Ft. Worth; Joseph H. Hodges, Bishop Of Wheeling; John L. Morkovsky, Apostolic Administrator Of Galveston-Houston; Victor J. Reed, Bishop Of Oklahoma City And Tulsa; L. J. Reicher, Bishop Of Austin; Thomas Tschoepe, Bishop Of San Angelo; Ernest L. Unterkoefler, Bishop Of Charleston; Vincent S. Waters, Bishop Of Raleigh; The National Catholic Conference For Interracial Justice; And The National Catholic Social Action Conference, William M. Lewers C.S.C, William B. Ball
Court Briefs
No. 395
Richard Perry Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia
On Appeal from the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
From the Summary Statement of the Case
Appellants, Richard Perry Loving and Mildred Jeter Loving, were convicted on January 6, 1959, in the Circuit Court of Caroline County, Virginia, under an indictment charging that "the said Richard Perry Loving being a White person and the said Mildred Delores Jeter [Loving] being a Colored person, did unlawfully and feloniously go out of the State of Virginia, for the purpose of being married and with the intention of returning to the State of …
Contempt-Injunctions-Federal Civil Contempt Decree Orders Deputy Sheriff To Resign From Office-Lance V. Plummer, Michigan Law Review
Contempt-Injunctions-Federal Civil Contempt Decree Orders Deputy Sheriff To Resign From Office-Lance V. Plummer, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
During the summer of 1964, a federal district judge issued an injunction prohibiting various St. Augustine, Florida organizations and other persons with notice of the injunction from harassing or intimidating Negroes who were seeking motel or restaurant accommodations. Appellant Lance, an unpaid volunteer deputy sheriff, was not a member of any of the enjoined organizations, but he had actual notice of the order. Nonetheless, six days after the injunction was issued, he engaged in activities designed to intimidate a Negro citizen. In a subsequent civil contempt action arising from these activities, the federal district judge, asserting jurisdiction over him because …
Elfbrandt V. Russell: The Demise Of The Loyalty Oath, Jerold H. Israel
Elfbrandt V. Russell: The Demise Of The Loyalty Oath, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
In Elfbrandt v. Russell, the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision, declared unconstitutional Arizona's requirement of a loyalty oath from state employees. At first glance, Elfbrandt appears to be just another decision voiding a state loyalty oath on limited grounds relating to the specific language of the particular oath. Yet, several aspects of Mr. Justice Douglas' opinion for the majority suggest that Elfbrandt is really of far greater significance: it may sharply limit the scope and coverage of loyalty oaths generally and, indeed, may presage a ruling invalidating all such oaths. Of course, only the Supreme Court can determine this. …
The Line Between Federal And State Court Jurisdiction, Leslie A. Anderson
The Line Between Federal And State Court Jurisdiction, Leslie A. Anderson
Michigan Law Review
From the beginning of this nation, there have been controversies involving the division of jurisdiction between federal and state courts. Often, these controversies have centered on the diversity of citizenship provision of the federal constitution. Today, however, the more poignant question is whether any division of jurisdiction between the federal and state systems retains logical bases.
Although myriad developments have relevancy with respect to this question, I have here focused upon two of the more important ones: the increasing overlap of subject matter being litigated in federal and state courts and the growing uniformity of standards to be applied in …
The Antitrust Expediting Act- A Critical Reappraisal, Robert C. Bonges
The Antitrust Expediting Act- A Critical Reappraisal, Robert C. Bonges
Michigan Law Review
The Expediting Act has been subject to some rather severe criticism from the bench and bar. At the extreme, it has been suggested that the act be repealed and the procedure for appealing government civil antitrust cases be completely overhauled. Even proponents of the act have acknowledged its need of revision, but there is little agreement among them on the extent and nature of desirable change. This comment will explore the origins, development, and current role of the Expediting Act in order to help determine what course revision, if it is needed, should follow.
The Abstention Doctrine: A Problem Of Federalism, Joyce Britt
The Abstention Doctrine: A Problem Of Federalism, Joyce Britt
Vanderbilt Law Review
Equitable abstention refers to the deference a federal court will give a state tribunal to determine the rights of the litigants, even though technically, a federal court could entertain the action, whether by means of diversity of citizenship or because of a federal issue involved. Because of comity, or convenience, or a sense of balance in the federal system, or better handling of the problem, or some other reason of policy, federal courts at times have required a litigant to proceed in the state courts before invoking federal court jurisdiction. How this doctrine arose, its extensions and limitations form the …
Voluntary Payments To Widows Of Corporate Executives: Gifts Or Income?, Paul A. Rothman
Voluntary Payments To Widows Of Corporate Executives: Gifts Or Income?, Paul A. Rothman
Michigan Law Review
The solicitude of hardhearted corporations for the widows of corporate executives has given rise to an abundance of cases involving the question whether payments to these widows constitute gifts or income. In the cases to be considered in this comment, payments are made by the corporation to the decedent's widow on a purely voluntary basis. In the typical situation, the board of directors adopts a resolution eulogizing the decedent and authorizing payments to his widow in recognition of his long and faithful service. In most cases, these payments are measured by the decedent's salary and continue for periods ranging from …
Federal Jurisdiction-Three-Judge Courts-The Recent Evolution In Jurisdiction And Appellate Review, Peter W. Williamson S.Ed.
Federal Jurisdiction-Three-Judge Courts-The Recent Evolution In Jurisdiction And Appellate Review, Peter W. Williamson S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
This comment seeks to analyze each decision against its historical background. No more than a proforma attempt will be made to integrate one decision with the others, for sufficient material is not yet available to predict with any accuracy the Court's ultimate achievements in this important area of federal civil procedure.
Legislative Apportionment And Representative Government: The Meaning Of Baker V. Carr, Jo Desha Lucas
Legislative Apportionment And Representative Government: The Meaning Of Baker V. Carr, Jo Desha Lucas
Michigan Law Review
In three recent cases the Supreme Court has reopened the question of the extent to which federal courts will review the general fairness of state schemes of legislative apportionment. It is a question on which the Court has had nothing to say for over a decade, leaving the bar to patch together the current state of the law from the outcome of cases disposed of without opinion considered against a backdrop of language used in earlier decisions.
Gideon V. Wainwright: The Art Of Overruling, Jerold H. Israel
Gideon V. Wainwright: The Art Of Overruling, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
During the 1962 Term, the Supreme Court, on a single Monday, announced six decisions concerned with constitutional limitations upon state criminal procedure. The most publicized of these, though probably not the most important in terms of legal theory or practical effect, was Gideon v. Wainwright. In an era of constantly expanding federal restrictions on state criminal processes, the holding of Gideon-that an indigent defendant in a state criminal prosecution has an unqualified right to the appointment of counsel-was hardly startling. And while Gideon will obviously have an important effect in the handful of states that still fail to appoint counsel …
The Constitution And Contempt Of Court, Ronald Goldfarb
The Constitution And Contempt Of Court, Ronald Goldfarb
Michigan Law Review
Few legal devices find conflict within the lines of our Constitution with the ubiquity of the contempt power. These conflicts involve issues concerning the governmental power structure such as the separation of powers and the delicate balancing of federal-state relations. In addition, there are civil rights issues attributable to the conflict between the use of the contempt power and such vital procedural protections as the right to trial by jury, freedom from self-incrimination, double jeopardy, and indictment-to name only the most recurrent and controversial examples. Aside from these problems, there are other civil liberties issues, such as those involving freedom …
Congressional Repair Of The Erie Derailment, Leonard V. Quigley
Congressional Repair Of The Erie Derailment, Leonard V. Quigley
Michigan Law Review
It is the thesis of this article that such legislative review and repair is required today on the part of the federal legislature in regard to the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts. Such reconsideration is particularly appropriate where, as in the analogous commerce clause area, the subject matter has been committed specifically to the Congress by the Constitution.
No-Strike Clauses In The Federal Courts, Frank H. Stewart
No-Strike Clauses In The Federal Courts, Frank H. Stewart
Michigan Law Review
One consideration will support several promises. A promisor may extract more than one promise in return for his single undertaking to do - or not to do. It depends upon his bargaining power. His single undertaking may be so valuable that several promises are necessary to induce him to act, or not to act. He is privileged to hold out for the best deal. The law does not examine his motives or reduce his demands. And from this arises the common- law principle that one consideration may support several promises.
Depositions For Discovery: The New Virginia Rule, J. Westwood Smithers
Depositions For Discovery: The New Virginia Rule, J. Westwood Smithers
University of Richmond Law Review
Important amendments to its Rules, effective April 1, 1961, were recently adopted by the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. Perhaps the change of most interest to trial lawyers was the revision of Rule 3:23 relating to D'epositions and Discovery in Actions at Law.
Attachment And Garnishment In The Federal Courts, Brainerd Currie
Attachment And Garnishment In The Federal Courts, Brainerd Currie
Michigan Law Review
Personal injuries allegedly caused by the negligent manufacture of safety fuses used in blasting operations in a coal mine were suffered by Raymond Davis, apparently a citizen of Arkansas. The manufacturer, Ensign-Bickford Company, was a Connecticut corporation that could not be personally served with process within Arkansas. But it happened that two foreign corporations, amenable to process in the state, were indebted in substantial amounts to Ensign-Bickford Company. Accordingly, counsel for Davis, invoking the diversity jurisdiction, filed an action in the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. Without issue of summons, the plaintiff, in conformity with Arkansas statutes, …
Book Review Of The People And The Court, Neil W. Schilke
Book Review Of The People And The Court, Neil W. Schilke
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
University Of Richmond Law Notes, J. Westwood Smithers
University Of Richmond Law Notes, J. Westwood Smithers
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Consent Decree In Antitrust Enforcement--Analysis And Criticism, J. Dennis Hynes
The Consent Decree In Antitrust Enforcement--Analysis And Criticism, J. Dennis Hynes
Publications
No abstract provided.
Administrative Law - Judicial Control - Appellate Review Of Federal Trade Commission Proceedings, David A. Nelson S. Ed.
Administrative Law - Judicial Control - Appellate Review Of Federal Trade Commission Proceedings, David A. Nelson S. Ed.
Michigan Law Review
During its forty-five year life the Federal Trade Commission has gone through some difficult periods to emerge today as one of the fundamental instrumentalities of government in the regulation of business. Its vast powers and influence, well known to lawyers, will not be explored here. Rather, the purpose of this comment is to appraise the extent of control which the judiciary now exercises over the commission in its adjudicative functions, so as to offer some indication to the practitioner of the probabilities regarding the outcome of judicial review on an appeal beyond the full commission. The approach to be used …
"Federal Question" Jurisdiction -- A Snare And A Delusion, Ernest J. London
"Federal Question" Jurisdiction -- A Snare And A Delusion, Ernest J. London
Michigan Law Review
Poorly defined criteria in the area of jurisdiction are especially wasteful, generating as they often do expensive and protracted litigation over threshold issues, rather than promoting the speedy determination of lawsuits on their merits. One of the most perplexing exercises in American law practice is the effort to define with certainty the original jurisdiction of the lower federal courts in matters where there is no diversity of citizenship. Although this general head of federal jurisdiction has persistently and pervasively been characterized as "federal question" jurisdiction, it is doubtful whether there is, in fact, original jurisdiction in the lower federal courts …
University Of Richmond Law Notes Table Of Contents
University Of Richmond Law Notes Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Foreward, William T. Muse
Foreward, William T. Muse
University of Richmond Law Review
The reception accorded the first number of the University of Richmond Law Notes, published last spring, has been most gratifying. It has encouraged the Faculty to prepare this second number, which also is being distributed to all alumni of the Law School through the courtesy of the University of Richmond Law School Association. There has been a modest volume of requests for copies of the first issue from non-alumni members of the bar and from many law libraries.
Constitutional Law - Right To Jury Trial In Indirect Criminal Contempts In Federal Courts, Denis T. Rice S.Ed.
Constitutional Law - Right To Jury Trial In Indirect Criminal Contempts In Federal Courts, Denis T. Rice S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Should constitutional provisions for jury trial apply to contempts committed outside the physical presence of a federal court? The United States Supreme Court, in the recent case of Green v. United States, reviewed this long disputed question. The case involved two Communist Party leaders who had been convicted of Smith Act violations and then had "jumped bail" when they disappeared in violation of surrender orders requiring their presence in court for sentencing. After four and a half years as fugitives they surrendered in 1956 and were charged with criminal contempt of court. Following a so-called "summary" hearing (without the …
University Of Richmond Law Notes Table Of Contents
University Of Richmond Law Notes Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Foreward, William T. Muse
Foreward, William T. Muse
University of Richmond Law Review
This first issue of the University of Richmond Law Notes inaugurates a service by the Faculty of the Law School which we hope will be of some value to the lawyers of Virginia. If the bar thinks the undertaking worth- while it will become a permanent publication,-perhaps enlarged in scope and volume.