Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

What Standard Of Proof Must Employers Satisfy To Demonstrate The Applicability Of A Fair Labor Standards Act Exemption?, Anne Marie Lofaso

Law Faculty Scholarship

Case at a Glance: Employees of E.M.D. Sales, Inc., an international food distributor, sued E.M.D., alleging that it violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) when it withheld overtime wages from these employees. As an affirmative defense, E.M.D. asserted that the employees were FLSA‑exempted outside salesmen. This case asks the Court to determine whether employers must use the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard or the clear-and-convincing evidence standard to prove the applicability of an exemption under the FLSA.

Borderline Ambiguity: Major Questions And Immigration Law, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Students For Fair Admissions Sends Us Bakke To The Drawing Board For Race- Conscious Affiffirmative Action In Higher Education, Monica Teixeira De Sousa

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Three Observations About Justice Alito's Draft Opinion In Dobbs - Commentary, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "There is much to say about Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which was leaked from the United States Supreme Court on May 2 [2022].

Obviously, the most significant direct consequence of the proposed decision, which overrules Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) while upholding the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that outlaws most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, would be the restriction or elimination of abortion services throughout much of the nation. This will have all sorts of attendant consequences, large and smaller, many of which …

Commentary: The Workplace Vaccine Decision And Its Implications For Federal Regulatory Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "In a recent commentary, I contrasted the pragmatic consequentialism of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer – and, more generally, the other two members of the court’s liberal bloc (Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) – with the structural formalism of the court’s six-justice conservative supermajority. I also suggested that this framework may provide a more useful way to understand many of the court’s recent and upcoming blockbuster decisions than the partisan angle that court watchers so frequently use."

Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso

Law Faculty Scholarship

Case at a Glance: LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company. Bradley LeDure, a long-time locomotive engineer for Union Pacific, slipped on the slick surface of a locomotive while it was idle but powered on, seriously injuring himself. If Union Pacific violated safety regulations under the Locomotive Inspection Act, then it would be negligent per se. But that theory of liability is only available if the locomotive was in use at the time of the accident. The case presents a question of statutory interpretation of the term use.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg’S Copyright Jurisprudence, Ann Bartow, Ryan G. Vacca

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt} "When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September 18, 2020, the world lost a trailblazer for gender equality, a pop culture icon, a feisty liberal luminary who fought on behalf of the disenfranchised in the areas of civil rights and social justice, and an inspiration to millions of people. She will long be remembered for the social changes she helped effectuate as an advocate, scholar, and jurist.

Her amazing civil rights legacy overshadows other areas where Justice Ginsburg’s contributions have been substantial. This Article discusses one of the most interesting: copyright law. During her time as a jurist on …

When Interpretive Communities Clash On Immigration Law: The Courts’ Mediating Role In Noncitizens’ Rights And Remedies, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Do Courts Have Jurisdiction To Consider Questions Of Fact To Determine Whether A Noncitizen Is Entitled To Eligibility For Discretionary Relief From Removal?, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article previews Patel v. Garland, a United States Supreme Court case addressing the scope of federal court jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), as amended by the REAL ID Act. The central question is whether federal courts retain jurisdiction to review nondiscretionary factual determinations underlying eligibility for discretionary relief from removal, or whether the statute’s bar on reviewing “any judgment” precludes judicial review of such threshold findings. The case arises from the denial of adjustment of status to Pankajkumar Patel, deemed inadmissible for allegedly falsely representing himself as a U.S. citizen on a driver’s license application. Both petitioner …

Does A State Violate Rluipa By Prohibiting An Inmate's Pastor From Laying Hands On Him And Audibly Praying During The Execution Process?, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article examines Ramirez v. Collier, a United States Supreme Court case addressing the scope of religious liberty protections afforded to death-row inmates under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). The case centers on whether Texas prison officials violate RLUIPA by prohibiting an inmate’s pastor from laying hands on him and praying audibly during the execution process. The dispute requires the Court to evaluate (1) whether such prohibitions substantially burden sincerely held religious beliefs, (2) whether the state satisfies RLUIPA’s strict scrutiny standard by demonstrating a compelling governmental interest advanced through the least restrictive …

United States Supreme Court Survey: 2018 Term: Iancu V. Brunetti: Free Speech Meets "Immoral And Scandalous" Trademarks In The Supreme Court, Niki Kuckes

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rescuing Our Democracy By Rethinking New York Times Co. V. Sullivan, David A. Logan

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Stays Asylum Injunction: Signal On The Merits Or Procedural Snag?, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Reinforces Mandatory Detention Of Immigrants, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Hard, Simple Truth About Gun Control, Carl Bogus

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Travel Ban Decision, Administrative Law, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Labor Law Illiteracy: Epic Systems Corp. V. Lewis And Janus V. Afscme, Michael Yelnosky

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Digital Realty Trust V. Somers: Whistleblowers And Corporate Retaliation, Susan B. Heyman

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Daca Case: Agencies’ “Square Corners” And Reliance Interests In Immigration Law, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Asylum Ban Litigation: Supreme Court Declines To Stay Injunction, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

At Oral Argument, Supreme Court Weighs Immigrant Detention, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Abortion Rights And The Kavanaugh Nomination, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Last week, President Trump nominated federal appeals court judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the Supreme Court seat opened by the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy. Immediately, coverage of the nomination focused on abortion and whether Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation would spell the end of the constitutional right recognized in Roe v. Wade. Let's explore why."

Kavanaugh And The Military Commissions: Reading The Law “As Written” For An Unpopular Defendant, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Scotus's 2017-2018 Term: More Of The 'Passive Virtues', John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[exerpt] "Examine a timelier topic: the court's decision to effectively punt on the major religious freedom and partisan gerrymandering cases it was poised to decide this term. For the court's restrain in these cases may have some relation to our turbulent political times."

Travel Ban Update: Fourth Circuit Affirms Injunction As Supreme Court Awaits Argument, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Curbing Remedies For Official Wrongs: The Need For Bivens Suits In National Security Cases, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

U.S. Supreme Court Surveys: 2016 Term. Murr. V. Wisconsin: Identifying The Proper "Parcel As A Whole" In Regulatory Takings Cases, Bruce I. Kogan

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

United States Supreme Court Surveys: 2016 Term. Still Standing After All These Years: Five Decades Of Litigation Under The Fair Housing Act And The Supreme Court Still Can't Say For Sure Who Is Protected, David A. Logan

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Travel Ban Update: Ninth Circuit Holds Eo-3 Exceeds President’S Power, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Travel Ban Update: Without Addressing The Merits, The Supreme Court Stays Injunction Pending Further Proceedings, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.