Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (31)
- Courts (20)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (18)
- Judges (18)
- Legal History (13)
-
- Criminal Procedure (12)
- Law and Race (11)
- Education Law (10)
- Jurisprudence (8)
- First Amendment (7)
- Legal Education (7)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (7)
- State and Local Government Law (7)
- Criminal Law (6)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (5)
- Jurisdiction (5)
- Litigation (5)
- Political Science (5)
- Evidence (4)
- Law and Society (4)
- Legal Profession (4)
- American Politics (3)
- Civil Procedure (3)
- Election Law (3)
- Juvenile Law (3)
- Labor and Employment Law (3)
- Law and Politics (3)
- Legislation (3)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (20)
- William & Mary Law School (19)
- New York Law School (10)
- University of Colorado Law School (10)
- University of Richmond (10)
-
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (5)
- Emory University School of Law (4)
- University of Baltimore Law (4)
- Boston University School of Law (3)
- Columbia Law School (3)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (3)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Association of American Law Schools (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (1)
- Notre Dame Law School (1)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- UIC School of Law (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (1)
- University of South Carolina (1)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (38)
- Supreme Court (14)
- Brown v. Board of Education (9)
- Federalism (8)
- Civil Rights (7)
-
- Race (7)
- Desegregation (6)
- Education (6)
- Congress (5)
- Judicial review (5)
- Sixth Amendment (5)
- Book reviews (4)
- Civil rights (4)
- Confrontation Clause (4)
- Supreme Court advocacy (4)
- Testimony (4)
- Tribal sovereignty (4)
- Constitution (3)
- Crawford v. Washington (3)
- Cross-examination (3)
- Fifth Amendment (3)
- Judicial process (3)
- Political questions and judicial power (3)
- Politics (3)
- Self-determination (3)
- Testimonial (3)
- Witnesses (3)
- Adler works (2)
- Admissibility (2)
- Authority (2)
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (10)
- Publications (10)
- Supreme Court Preview (10)
- Faculty Scholarship (9)
- University of Richmond Law Review (9)
-
- Articles (8)
- NYLS Law Review (8)
- Faculty Publications (7)
- All Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Faculty Articles (5)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (5)
- American Indian Law Review (3)
- Articles & Chapters (2)
- Public Interest Law Reporter (2)
- William & Mary Law Review (2)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (1)
- Faculty Works (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Journal of Legal Education (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (1)
- North Carolina Central Law Review (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship (1)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 91 - 107 of 107
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
The Hillmon Case, The Macguffin, And The Supreme Court, Marianne Wesson
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 …
Judicial Federalism And The Future Of Federal Environmental Regulation, Jonathan H. Adler
Judicial Federalism And The Future Of Federal Environmental Regulation, Jonathan H. Adler
Faculty Publications
This article assesses the current and likely impact of the Supreme Court's federalism cases on federal environmental regulation. As a result of this assessment, the article seeks to make four points: (1) Thus far, the Supreme Court's federalism cases have had a limited impact on federal regulation, as federal courts have not used these cases as a basis for limiting the reach of federal regulatory authority. (2) Notwithstanding this limited impact, the underlying logic of the Supreme Court's cases does pose a challenge for federal regulation, particularly in the Commerce Clause context. (3) The thrust of the federalism cases makes …
Is Morrison Dead? Assessing A Supreme Drug (Law) Overdose, Jonathan H. Adler
Is Morrison Dead? Assessing A Supreme Drug (Law) Overdose, Jonathan H. Adler
Faculty Publications
There was little doubt that the federal government would prevail in Gonzales v. Raich. What was, perhaps, so unexpected was so expansive a repudiation of enforceable judicial limitations on federal power. In upholding the constitutionality of the Controlled Substances Act as-applied to the non-commercial intrastate possession and consumption of marijuana for medical purposes as authorized under California law, the Supreme Court hollowed out the core of contemporary Commerce Clause jurisprudence. Insofar as United States v. Morrison had stood for the propositions that only intrastate economic activities could be aggregated for purposes of the “substantial [e]ffects” test, that attenuated connections …
Zelman V. Simmons-Harris, Neal Devins
In Cases Involving Sites Of Religious Significance, Plaintiffs Will Fall In The Gap Of Judicial Deference That Exists Between The Religion Clauses Of The First Amendment, Jeff Pinter
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Potential Passage Of Proposed Senate Bill 578 And Its Implication On Hicks V. Nevada And Twenty Years Of Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Richard L. Warren
The Potential Passage Of Proposed Senate Bill 578 And Its Implication On Hicks V. Nevada And Twenty Years Of Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Richard L. Warren
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
Giving Up The "I": How The National Museum Of The American Indian Appropriated Tribal Voices, Whitney Kerr
Giving Up The "I": How The National Museum Of The American Indian Appropriated Tribal Voices, Whitney Kerr
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
Crawford Surprises: Mostly Unpleasant, Richard D. Friedman
Crawford Surprises: Mostly Unpleasant, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Crawford v. Washington should not have been surprising. The Confrontation Clause guarantees a criminal defendant the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him." The doctrine of Ohio v. Roberts, treating the clause as a general proscription against the admission of hearsay-except hearsay that fits within a "firmly rooted" exception or is otherwise deemed reliable-had so little to do with the constitutional text, or with the history or principle behind it, that eventually it was bound to be discarded. And the appeal of a testimonial approach to the clause seemed sufficiently strong to yield high hopes that ultimately the …
Grappling With The Meaning Of 'Testimonial', Richard D. Friedman
Grappling With The Meaning Of 'Testimonial', Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Crawford v. Washington, has adopted a testimonial approach to the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. Under this approach, a statement that is deemed to be testimonial in nature may not be introduced at trial against an accused unless he has had an opportunity to cross-examine the person who made the statement and that person is unavailable to testify at trial. If a statement is not deemed to be testimonial, then the Confrontation Clause poses little if any obstacle to its admission.2 A great deal therefore now rides on the meaning of the word "testimonial."
Yale Kamisar: A Principled Man For All Seasons, Douglas A. Kahn
Yale Kamisar: A Principled Man For All Seasons, Douglas A. Kahn
Articles
Yale Kamisar began his distinguished career as a law professor in 1957 at the University of Minnesota Law School. For three years prior to joining the Minnesota faculty, Yale had been an associate with the Washington, D.C. law firm of Covington & Burling specializing in antitrust law. Understandably, Yale and Minnesota assumed that he would devote the major part of his research and teaching to antitrust. At that time, the study of criminal law was near the bottom of the hierarchy of law school topics, and so young faculty often were assigned the task of teaching criminal law as the …
The Other Sullivan Case, Garrett Epps, Garrett Epps
The Other Sullivan Case, Garrett Epps, Garrett Epps
All Faculty Scholarship
The standard triumphalist narrative of NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN celebrates the Supreme Court's defense of free speech and press in the case's vindication of powerful journalistic institution. Ignored in this story is the story of the local defendants, civil rights leaders in Alabama who had their solvency threatened by the state courts' vindictive action against them. These defendants challenged the segregated proceedings used in court to affix liability to them—but the Supreme Court ignored their arguments and ignored the racial-equality and individual-rights aspects of the case. From their point of view, SULLIVAN might be so unalloyed a triumph.
The Irrational Supreme Court, Michael I. Meyerson
The Irrational Supreme Court, Michael I. Meyerson
All Faculty Scholarship
Rationality is prized by lawyers. The 'rational review' test provides the constitutional minimum for due process and equal protection analysis. Unfortunately, even in an idealized world populated by perfectly rational people not all causes of irrational decision-making can be avoided. The basic nature of group decision-making inevitably creates the possibility of certain kinds of irrationality. The core of the problem is that, while deciding which party prevails is a binary decision [either one side or the other wins], there are often multiple issues that need to be decided in any particular case. The task of creating a system for selecting …
Anatomy Of An Oral Argument, Rodney A. Smolla
Anatomy Of An Oral Argument, Rodney A. Smolla
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Laugh Track, Jay D. Wexler
Laugh Track, Jay D. Wexler
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court may have its own police force, its own museum curator, and even its own basketball court, but unlike the courts of yore it has no Jester. As a result, the responsibility of delivering humor within the hallowed halls of One First Street falls squarely on the backs of the nine Justices themselves. But which Justice provides the best comic entertainment for the court watchers, lawyers, and staff that make up the Court’s audience on any given argument day? Surely many believe that Justice Scalia, with his acerbic wit and quick tongue, has provided the most laughs from …
A Criminal Procedure Regime Based On Instrumental Values: A Review Of 'About Guilt And Innocence: The Origins, Development, And Future Of Constitutional Criminal Procedure,' By Donald A. Dripps (Prager Publishers, 2003), Tracey Maclin
Faculty Scholarship
Like many legal academics, Professor Donald Dripps believes that the Supreme Court's criminal procedure doctrine is a mess. Dripps believes that the Court's doctrine "is in large measure responsible for the failure of the criminal-procedure revolution" and contends that "current doctrine does not reflect prevailing (and justified) values about criminal process." To prove his claim, Dripps has written a book that expertly identifies the flaws, inconsistencies and missteps of the Court's constitutional criminal procedure cases dating back to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. "About Guilt and Innocence: The Origins, Development, and Future of Constitutional Criminal Procedure" is a comprehensive …
Looking Ahead: October Term 2006, Peter B. Rutledge
Looking Ahead: October Term 2006, Peter B. Rutledge
Scholarly Works
October Term 2006 will be the first full opportunity for Court-watchers to assess the impact of recent changes in the Court's membership. It will be Chief Justice Roberts' second full term and Justice Alito's first. It also will provide the first full term in which to assess whether Justice Kennedy will reclaim his role as "swing justice." Accompanying these changes in the Court's personnel will be a docket full of interesting cases on topics such as the constitutionality of racial diversity programs, abortion, environmental law, punitive damages, and criminal procedure. Consistent with prior contributions to this series, this essay offers …
Just Blowing Smoke? Politics, Doctrine, And The Federalist Revival After Gonzales V. Raich, Ernest A. Young
Just Blowing Smoke? Politics, Doctrine, And The Federalist Revival After Gonzales V. Raich, Ernest A. Young
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.