Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Abbott, Aids, And The Ada: Why A Per Se Disability Rule For Hiv/Aids Is Both Just And A Must, Scott Thompson

Publications

HIV/AIDS should be classified as a per se disability under the Americans with Disablities Act. Such a ruling is justified by the plain language of the act itself, legislative history, administrative regulations, and court precedent. Absent such a ruling, individuals with HIV must demonstrate that they have (1) an mental or physical impairment, (2) that substantially limits (3) a major life activity. While most courts to address the applicability of the ADA to individuals with HIV/AIDS have found that such individuals are disabled because HIV impairs the major life activity of reproduction, such an interpretation leaves open the possibility that …

Cross-Examination Earlier Or Later: When Is It Enough To Satisfy Crawford?, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Sending The Self-Execution Doctrine To The Executioner, Aya Gruber

Publications

No abstract provided.

Who's Afraid Of Geneva Law?, Aya Gruber

Publications

According to many internationalists, the terrorism detention cases Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld are exemplary of a movement on the part of the Supreme Court toward greater incorporation of and respect for international law. Recent death penalty cases, statements of individual justices, and the increasing transnationalism of the Court's docket have lead many to believe, as Justice Ginsburg does, that the Court's "island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change." This Article takes the contrary position that Hamdi and Hamdan are not internationalist because of their meticulous avoidance of the issue of Geneva Convention self-execution. Briefly, the …

A Perspective On Federal Corporation Law, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

No abstract provided.

From "Navigable Waters" To "Constitutional Waters": The Future Of Federal Wetlands Regulation, Mark Squillace

Publications

Wetlands regulation in the United States has a tumultuous history. The early European settlers viewed wetlands as obstacles to development, and they drained and filled wetlands and swamps at an astounding rate, often with government support, straight through the middle of the twentieth century. As evidence of the ecological significance of wetlands emerged over the last several decades, programs to protect and restore wetlands became prominent. Most notable among these is the permitting program under § 404 of the Clean Water Act. That provision prohibits dredging or filling of "navigable waters," defined by law to mean "waters of the United …

Dura Duress: The Supreme Court Mandates A More Rigorous Pleading And Proof Requirement For Loss Causation Under Rule Lob-5 Class Actions, Jared Neas

University of Colorado Law Review

The Supreme Court's holding in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo imposes a heightened pleading requirement for private plaintiffins misrepresentation or omission securities class actions under Rule lOb-5. The Court verified that a plaintiff must adequately plead loss causation in its complaint and rejected the Ninth Circuit's interpretation of the loss causation standard. The Supreme Court held that the plaintif's pleadings in Dura did not meet the loss causation requirement of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ("PSLRA'). The Court also rejected the Ninth Circuit's requirement that the alleged misconduct merely "touch upon " the economic loss. Instead, the Supreme Court …

"Remarkable Stratagems And Conspiracies": How Unscrupulous Lawyers And Credulous Judges Created An Exception To The Hearsay Rule, Marianne Wesson

Publications

This paper, a companion piece to the author's earlier exploration of the case of Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hillmon, describes the remarkable record of unethical conduct compiled by the eminent and respectable attorneys for the insurance companies in the course of that litigation. When married with the Supreme Court Justices' uncritical willingness to accept the false narrative thus contrived, these attorneys' misconduct led to the creation of an important rule of evidence - a rule of questionable merit. This article aims to remind us that lawyers who are willing to distort the process of litigation have the power …

Essentially A Mother, Jennifer S. Hendricks

Publications

This article connects the constitutional jurisprudence of the family to debates over reproductive technology and surrogacy. Despite the outpouring of literature on reproductive technologies, courts and scholars have paid little attention to the constitutional foundation of parental rights. Focusing on the structural/political function of parental rights, this article argues that a gestational mother has a constitutional claim to be recognized as a legal parent.

The article first discusses the "unwed father cases." Despite believing that natural sex differences justified distinctions in parental rights, the Supreme Court crafted a test giving men parental rights if they established relationships with their biological …

Fighting Discrimination While Fighting Litigation: A Tale Of Two Supreme Courts, Scott A. Moss

Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued an odd mix of pro-plaintiff and pro-defendant employment law rulings. It has disallowed harassment lawsuits against employers even with failed antiharassment efforts, construed statutes of limitations narrowly to bar suits about ongoing promotion and pay discrimination, and denied protection to public employee internal complaints. Yet the same Court has issued significant unanimous rulings easing discrimination plaintiffs' burdens of proof.

This jurisprudence is often miscast in simple pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant terms. The Court's duality traces to its inconsistent and unaware adoption of competing policy arguments:

Policy 1: Employees must try internal dispute resolution before suing--or …

The Incompatibility Principle, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

Keynote Address: Indigenous Peoples And Their Mark On The International Legal System, S. James Anaya

Publications

No abstract provided.

In The Wake Of Republic Of Austria V. Altmann: The Current Status Of Foreign Sovereign Immunity In United States Courts, David P. Vandenberg

University of Colorado Law Review

In Republic of Austria v. Altmann, the United States Supreme Court held that conduct predating the passage of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act of 1976 could nonetheless be grounds for a claim under the Act. This article begins with a historical survey of foreign sovereign immunity in the U.S. legal system. However, it is foremost an analysis and critique of the Supreme Court's opinion in Altmann. It argues that in the wake of the Court's decision, the floodgates will not open to a rash of foreign sovereign immunity claims based on long-ago conduct because other factors-both legal and practical will …

Foreword, Richard B. Collins

Publications

No abstract provided.

Raising The Red Flag: The Continued Relevance Of The Japanese Internment In The Post-Hamdi World, Aya Gruber

Publications

In the years since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the Japanese interment has re-emerged as a topic of serious discourse among legal scholars, politicians, civil libertarians, and society in general. Current national security policies have created concerns that the government has stepped dangerously close to the line crossed by the Roosevelt administration during World War II. Civil libertarians invoke the internment to caution policy-makers against two of the most serious dangers of repressive national security policies: racial decision-making and incarceration without process. Bush defenders advance several arguments in response to internment comparisons. The most conservative is an ardent defense …

Skepticism And Expertise: The Supreme Court And The Eeoc, Melissa Hart

Publications

The Supreme Court regularly denies deference to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretations of the federal antidiscrimination laws which that agency is charged with enforcing and interpreting. The Court's lack of deference for EEOC interpretation is in part a function of the analytical framework that the Court has created for assessing the deference due to different types of administrative interpretation. But this essay argues that the Court's lack of deference cannot be entirely explained with reference to these neutral analytical criteria. The Court's attitude toward the EEOC may also be explained as a consequence both of judicial reluctance to view …

The Renaissance Of Tribal Sovereignty, The Negative Doctrinal Feedback Loop, And The Rise Of A New Exceptionalism, Sarah Krakoff

Publications

No abstract provided.

Crawford At Two: Testimonial Hearsay And The Confrontation Clause, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This article addresses the response of Colorado courts, and that of certain other jurisdictions, to the 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Crawford v. Washington.

"Particular Intentions": The Hillmon Case And The Supreme Court, Marianne Wesson

Publications

The case of Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hillmon is one of the most influential decisions in the law of evidence. Decided by the Supreme Court in 1892, it invented an exception to the hearsay rule for statements encompassing the intentions of the declarant. But this exception seems not to rest on any plausible theory of the categorical reliability of such statements. This article suggests that the case turned instead on the Court's attachment to a particular narrative about the events that gave rise to the case, events that produced a corpse of disputed identity. The author's investigations into newspaper …

Merrill Lynch V. Dabit: Federal Preemption Of Holders' Class Actions, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

No abstract provided.

Academic Freedom: Disciplinary Lessons From Hogwarts, Emily M. Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

Contextualizing The Losses Of Allotment Through Literature, Kristen A. Carpenter

Publications

In this article, the Author undertakes a law and literature approach to a major Indian law problem: understanding the losses of allotment. Allotment was a mid 19th - early 20th century federal legislative program to take large tracts of land owned by Indian tribes, allocate smaller parcels to individual Indians, and sell off the rest to non-Indians. The idea was that Indians would abandon traditional patterns of subsistence to become American-style farmers, and great tracts of land would be freed up for the advance of white settlement. A key component of the federal government's larger project of assimilating Indians into …

The Virtues And Vices Of Sovereignty, Sarah Krakoff

Publications

American Indian tribal sovereignty is viewed very differently in the United States Supreme Court than it is in American Indian tribal nations. The United States Supreme Court, the progenitor of the legal doctrine of tribal sovereignty, appears skeptical of the doctrine's continuing viability. The Court is therefore veering away from any strong notion of retained inherent tribal sovereignty. American Indian tribes, the sources and perpetuators of de facto tribal sovereignty, are more committed than ever to enacting their sovereignty on the ground, as well as promoting and protecting its legal status in the courts and in Congress. There is an …

Fighting To Keep Employment Discrimination Class Actions Alive: How Allison V. Citgo's Predomination Requirement Threatens To Undermine Title Vii Enforcement, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

The Civil Rights Act of 1991, which provides compensatory and punitive damages and attendant jury trials in cases alleging intentional discrimination, was designed to enhance enforcement and expand remedies. Its enactment, however, has triggered a schism among the circuit courts over what the proper standard is for determining whether monetary damages or injunctive relief predominates, a necessary inquiry for determining whether plaintiffs are entitled to class certification for Title VII claims under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Led by the Fifth Circuit, some federal appeals courts contend that monetary relief predominates unless it is “incidental,” and …

Taking Miranda's Pulse, William T. Pizzi, Morris B. Hoffman

Publications

No abstract provided.

City Of Sherrill V. Oneida Indian Nation Of New York: A Regretful Postscript To The Taxation Chapter In Cohen's Handbook Of Federal Indian Law, Sarah Krakoff

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Hillmon Case, The Macguffin, And The Supreme Court, Marianne Wesson

Publications

The case of Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hillmon is one of the most influential decisions in the law of evidence. Decided by the Supreme Court in 1892, it invented an exception to the hearsay rule for statements encompassing the intentions of the declarant. But this exception seems not to rest on any plausible theory of the categorical reliability of such statements. This article suggests that the case turned instead on the Court's understanding of the facts of the underlying dispute about the identity of a corpse. The author's investigations into newspaper archives and the original case documents point to …

Recovering Homelands, Governance, And Lifeways: A Book Review Of Blood Struggle: The Rise Of Modern Indian Nations, Kristen A. Carpenter

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court, Rule 10b-5, And The Federalization Of Corporate Law, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

This Article examines Supreme Court jurisprudence since 1997 under the federal securities laws in light of the Court's earlier securities law decisions and in light of its recent decisions construing the Constitution and federal statutes as they relate to the regulation of business. These post-1977 cases strongly suggest that the much-heralded new federalism philosophy of the Supreme Court is not a factor in securities law cases or in business cases generally. Indeed, the opposite seems to be the case. In this context, new federalism cases appear to be an anomaly, with the reality being that the Court is still as …

Moody Investing And The Supreme Court: Rethinking The Materiality Of Information And The Reasonableness Of Investors, Peter H. Huang

Publications

This Article critically analyzes the judicial decisions and reasoning of the United States Supreme Court and lower courts accepting certain defenses in securities fraud litigation. This Article develops how and why the core notions of materiality of information and the reasonable investor should be revised in light of recent empirical data, experimental evidence, and theoretical models of moody investing. This Article proposes modifying three recent developments in materiality doctrine to take into account moody investing. In particular, this Article argues that current judicial treatment of puffery is flawed because it neglects the power of puffery to alter moods. This Article …