Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (31)
- Constitutional Law (29)
- Judges (20)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (10)
- State and Local Government Law (10)
-
- Criminal Procedure (9)
- Law and Politics (7)
- Legislation (7)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (7)
- Fourteenth Amendment (6)
- Jurisprudence (6)
- Civil Procedure (5)
- Labor and Employment Law (5)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (5)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (4)
- First Amendment (4)
- Models and Methods (4)
- Political Science (4)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (3)
- Election Law (3)
- Family Law (3)
- Law and Gender (3)
- Law and Race (3)
- Legal Biography (3)
- Legal History (3)
- Litigation (3)
- Sociology (3)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (29)
- William & Mary Law School (17)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (11)
- University of Richmond (7)
- Emory University School of Law (6)
-
- University of Colorado Law School (6)
- Columbia Law School (3)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (3)
- University of Baltimore Law (3)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (3)
- Boston University School of Law (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (2)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (2)
- UIC School of Law (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Georgia State University College of Law (1)
- Notre Dame Law School (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- Suffolk University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Dayton (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Montana (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (39)
- Supreme Court (13)
- Judicial review (5)
- Employment discrimination (4)
- Federal courts (4)
-
- Justices (4)
- Lawyers (4)
- Antitrust (3)
- Antitrust enforcement (3)
- Chicago School of antitrust (3)
- Civil rights (3)
- Death penalty (3)
- Federal agencies (3)
- First Amendment (3)
- Litigation (3)
- State courts (3)
- Trials (3)
- Abortion (2)
- Adler works (2)
- Barack Obama (2)
- Capital punishment (2)
- Certiorari (2)
- Child welfare (2)
- Children (2)
- Commercial Law (2)
- Congress (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Constitutional interpretation (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Constitutionality (2)
- Publication
-
- Articles (13)
- Faculty Publications (10)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (9)
- Faculty Scholarship (8)
- Supreme Court Preview (7)
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (6)
- Faculty Articles (6)
- Other Publications (6)
- Publications (6)
- University of Richmond Law Review (6)
- Book Chapters (2)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (2)
- Georgia Law Review (2)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Articles (2)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (2)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Book Reviews (1)
- Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution (1)
- Cardozo Law Review (1)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (1)
- Faculty Law Review Articles (1)
- Faculty Publications By Year (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Library Staff Publications (1)
- Management and Marketing Faculty Publications (1)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 91 - 112 of 112
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Procedural Obstacles To Reviewing Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel Claims In State And Federal Postconviction Proceedings., Eve Brensike Primus
Procedural Obstacles To Reviewing Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel Claims In State And Federal Postconviction Proceedings., Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel is one of the most frequently raised claims in state and federal postconviction petitions. This is hardly surprising given reports of trial attorneys who refuse to investigate their cases before trial, never meet with their clients before the day of trial, and fail to file any motions or object to inadmissible evidence offered at trial. Unfortunately, the current structure of indigent defense funding makes it impossible for many public defenders to provide effective representation to their clients.
Securities Law And The New Deal Justices, Adam C. Pritchard, Robert B. Thompson
Securities Law And The New Deal Justices, Adam C. Pritchard, Robert B. Thompson
Articles
In this Article, we explore the role of the New Deal Justices in enacting, defending, and interpreting the federal securities laws. Although we canvass most of the Court's securities law decisions from 1935 to 1955, we focus in particular on PUHCA, an act now lost to history for securities practitioners and scholars. At the time of the New Deal, PUHCA was the key point of engagement for defining the judicial view toward New Deal securities legislation. Taming the power of Wall Street required not just the concurrence of the legislative branch, but also the Supreme Court, a body that the …
Protecting A Parent's Right To Counsel In Child Welfare Cases, Vivek Sankaran
Protecting A Parent's Right To Counsel In Child Welfare Cases, Vivek Sankaran
Articles
A national consensus is emerging that zealous leagal representation for parents is crucial to ensure that the child welfare system produces just outcomes for children. Parents' lawyers protect important constitutional rights, prevent the unnecessary entry of children into foster care and guide parents through a complex system.
Barack Obama, Margarita Lopez Torres, And The Path To Nomination, Ellen D. Katz
Barack Obama, Margarita Lopez Torres, And The Path To Nomination, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Operating within these regimes, Obama was able to mount a credible--and ultimately successful--challenge to the leadership's choice for the nomination while Lopez Torres could not. This article offers an explanation why. It argues that Obama succeeded where Lopez Torres failed because the nomination process Obama traversed was more penetrable and more contestable than the one Lopez Torres faced.
Florida V. Bostick, Yale Kamisar
Florida V. Bostick, Yale Kamisar
Other Publications
501 U.S. 429 (1991), argued 26 Feb. 1991, decided 20 June 1991 by vote of 6 to 3; O’Connor for the Court, Marshall in dissent. What constitutes a “seizure” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment? Police practices need not be “reasonable”—indeed, are not regulated by the Fourth Amendment at all—unless they are considered “searches” or “seizures.” In this case, which involved a growing antidrug police tactic known as “working the buses” (randomly approaching a bus passenger and asking him for identification and to grant permission to search his luggage), the Court took a narrow view of what constitutes a …
Mallory V. United States, Yale Kamisar
Mallory V. United States, Yale Kamisar
Other Publications
354 U.S. 449 (1957), argued 1 Apr. 1957, decided 24 June 1957 by vote of 9 to 0; Frankfurter for the Court. Although the power of the Supreme Court to overturn state convictions is limited to the enforcement of Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, the Court may formulate rules of evidence in the exercise of its “supervisory power” over the administration of federal criminal justice that go well beyond due process requirements. The best-known example is the McNabb-Mallory rule.
Miranda V. Arizona, Yale Kamisar
Miranda V. Arizona, Yale Kamisar
Other Publications
384 U.S. 436 (1966), argued 28 Feb. 1966, decided 13 June 1966 by vote of 5 to 4; Warren for the Court, Clark, Harlan, White, and Stewart in dissent. The Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure reached its high point (or, depending upon one's perspective, its low point) on 13 June 1966. That day the Court handed down its opinion in Miranda, the most famous, and most bitterly criticized, confession case in the nation's history. To some, Miranda symbolized the legal system's determination to treat even the lowliest and most despicable criminal suspect with dignity and respect. But …
California V. Acevedo, Yale Kamisar
California V. Acevedo, Yale Kamisar
Other Publications
500 U.S. 565 (1991), argued 8 Jan. 1991, decided 30 May 1991 by vote of 6 to 3; Blackmun for the Court, Scalia concurring, Stevens in dissent. Until the 1991 Acevedo case was decided, two different rules governed the search of closed containers found in a motor vehicle. In United States v. Ross (1982), the Court held that if the police had probable cause to search an entire vehicle for contraband and came upon a closed container in the course of the automobile search, they could open the container without first obtaining a warrant. On the other hand, in Arkansas …
Escobedo V. Illinois, Yale Kamisar
Escobedo V. Illinois, Yale Kamisar
Other Publications
378 U.S. 438 (1964), argued 29 Apr. 1964, decided 22 June 1964 by vote of 5 to 4; Goldberg for the Court, Harlan, Stewart, White, and Clark in dissent. When Danny Escobedo, a murder suspect, was taken to the police station and put in an interrogation room, he repeatedly asked to speak to the lawyer he had retained. Escobedo's lawyer soon arrived at the station house and repeatedly asked to see his client. Despite the persistent efforts of both Escobedo and his lawyer, the police prevented them from meeting. The police also failed to advise Escobedo of his right to …
Massiah V. United States, Yale Kamisar
Massiah V. United States, Yale Kamisar
Other Publications
377 U.S. 201 (1964), argued 3 Mar. 1964, decided 18 May 1964 by vote of 6 to 3; Stewart for the Court, White in dissent. Massiah was decided at a time when the Warren Court's “revolution in American criminal procedure” was accelerating. According to Massiah, after the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings (by indictment, as in Massiah's case, or by information, preliminary hearing or arraignment), the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to rely on counsel as the “medium” between himself and the government. Thus, once adversary proceedings have begun, the government cannot bypass the defendant's lawyer and …
A House Divided: Earl Caldwell, The New York Times, And The Quest For A Testimonial Privilege, Eric Easton
A House Divided: Earl Caldwell, The New York Times, And The Quest For A Testimonial Privilege, Eric Easton
All Faculty Scholarship
In the 1972 case of Branzburg v. Hayes, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment does not protect journalists who refuse to reveal their confidential sources or news gathering product in response to a federal grand jury subpoena. That decision has remained vital for 35 years and has reverberated through a number of recent high-profile cases. Despite some form of protection in nearly every state court, reporters haled before a federal judge may have no recourse save prison. Devastating as Branzburg has been for the so-called journalist's privilege, its negative impact has been far broader. Branzburg is one of …
An Open Letter From Heaven To Barack Obama, F. Michael Higginbotham
An Open Letter From Heaven To Barack Obama, F. Michael Higginbotham
All Faculty Scholarship
Since the passing of A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr. in 1998, many have wondered what the award winning author, longest-serving black federal judge, first black to head a federal regulatory agency, recipient of the Spingarn Medal and the Congressional Medal of Freedom, and author of the famous “Open Letter to Clarence Thomas” would think of the state of race relations today. Appointed to the Federal Trade Commission in 1962, Higginbotham served in several powerful federal positions including Vice-Chairman of the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, member of the first wiretap surveillance court, and chief judge of a …
Setting The Size Of The Supreme Court, F. Andrew Hessick, Samuel P. Jordan
Setting The Size Of The Supreme Court, F. Andrew Hessick, Samuel P. Jordan
All Faculty Scholarship
As with any institutional feature, the size of the Supreme Court should be informed by a definition of functional goals. This article describes how the current size of the Supreme Court is largely untethered from any such definition, and it begins the process of understanding how size and Court performance might interact. To do so, it identifies a list of institutional goals for the Supreme Court and explores how changing the size of the Court promotes or obstructs the attainment of those goals. Given that the Court's institutional goals are numerous and occasionally in tension, there is no definitive answer …
Toward A Theory Of Persuasive Authority, Chad Flanders
Toward A Theory Of Persuasive Authority, Chad Flanders
All Faculty Scholarship
The debate about the citation of foreign authorities has become stale. One side says that citing foreign authorities means being beholden to foreign sovereigns. The other side responds that this is nonsense, as the authorities are being used only for their "persuasive value." But do we even have a good idea of what it means to be a persuasive authority? My essay is the first to focus entirely on the notion of persuasive authority and to make the first steps towards providing a general theory of it. I make two major contributions. First, I try to show that there is …
The Violent Bear It Away: Emmett Till & The Modernization Of Law Enforcement In Mississippi, Anders Walker
The Violent Bear It Away: Emmett Till & The Modernization Of Law Enforcement In Mississippi, Anders Walker
All Faculty Scholarship
Few racially motivated crimes have left a more lasting imprint on American memory than the death of Emmett Till. Yet, even as Till's murder in Mississippi in 1955 has come to be remembered as a catalyst for the civil rights movement, it contributed to something else as well. Precisely because it came on the heels of the Supreme Court's 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, Till's death convinced Mississippi Governor James P. Coleman that certain aspects of the state's handling of racial matters had to change. Afraid that popular outrage over racial violence might encourage federal intervention in …
Ricci Glitch? The Unexpected Appearance Of Transferred Intent In Title Vii, Kerri Lynn Stone
Ricci Glitch? The Unexpected Appearance Of Transferred Intent In Title Vii, Kerri Lynn Stone
Faculty Publications
In the case of Ricci v. DeStefano, the Supreme Court officially opened the door to what this Article identifies as a theory of “transferred intent” jurisprudence under Title VII. The principle of transferred intent, borrowed from tort and criminal law, has never before been seen as factoring into Title VII antidiscrimination jurisprudence. In Ricci, the Supreme Court assumed that a city’s refusal to promote firefighters qualifying for promotion based on exams that appeared to disproportionately screen out members of minority groups amounted to deliberate discrimination, irrespective of their individual races or whether their individual races were actually taken into account. …
Supreme Court Justices, Empathy, And Social Change: A Comment On Lani Guinier's Demosprudence Through Dissent, Linda C. Mcclain
Supreme Court Justices, Empathy, And Social Change: A Comment On Lani Guinier's Demosprudence Through Dissent, Linda C. Mcclain
Faculty Scholarship
Justice Souter's imminent retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court provides President Obama with his first opportunity for a judicial nomination to the high court. President Obama's remarks about the relevance of life experience and of empathy are sparking discussion of relevant judicial qualifications. This Essay examines Professor Lani Guinier's recent argument that dissenting justices, particularly through the use of oral dissents, may spur ordinary people to action and that such dissents may expand the range of democratic action, as part of what she and Gerald Torres call "demosprudence." That controversial decisions by the United States Supreme Court can spur dissenting …
Justice Ginsburg's Dissent In Bush V. Gore, Hugh Baxter
Justice Ginsburg's Dissent In Bush V. Gore, Hugh Baxter
Faculty Scholarship
In this essay, I examine Justice Ginsburg's dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore, the decision that ended the 2000 controversy over the winner of the presidency. I look critically at Justice Ginsburg's invocation of federalism-based deference to the Florida courts' interpretations of state election law in the recount controversy. I consider also Justice Ginsburg's criticisms of the Court's remedial decision to stop the recounts. Finally, I take up the much-debated question of how to understand Justice Ginsburg's final two words: "I dissent," rather than "I respectfully dissent." My conclusion is that the omission of "respectfully" is pointed, but not for …
"Rabbit" Hunting In The Supreme Court: The Constitutionality Of State Prohibitions Of Sex Toy Sales Following Lawrence V. Texas, William C. Hayes
"Rabbit" Hunting In The Supreme Court: The Constitutionality Of State Prohibitions Of Sex Toy Sales Following Lawrence V. Texas, William C. Hayes
Georgia Law Review
Sexual norms in the United States are in flux. The rapid growth of the adult industry and the popularity of television shows that deal with sexuality evidence an ever-growing trend towards more liberal sexual norms. While many Americans accept-or even welcome-this shift in our sexual culture, others feel significant anxieties about the moral well-being of the community as a result of this shift away from traditional,conservative sexual values. As the culture war wages on, some states have chosen to respond to these anxieties through legislation. The U.S. Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, however, appears to have called …
Alive But Not Well: Manifest Disregard After Hall Street, Kevin P. Murphy
Alive But Not Well: Manifest Disregard After Hall Street, Kevin P. Murphy
Georgia Law Review
Arbitration is supposed to make dispute resolution faster and more cost-effective for litigants. To this end, Congress severely limited the ways in which a court can review an arbitrator's decision. But for the last fifty years courts have allowed parties an additional non statutory avenue for challenging arbitration awards. Where an arbitrator makes a decision in manifest disregard of the law, a court may vacate the award. To prove manifest disregard,parties must prove the arbitrator was aware of the law that should govern the dispute, but deliberately chose to ignore it. This often-argued, but seldom successful, claim increases the costs …
On Capturing The Possible Significance Of Institutional Design And Ethos, Peter L. Strauss
On Capturing The Possible Significance Of Institutional Design And Ethos, Peter L. Strauss
Faculty Scholarship
At a recent conference, a new judge from one of the federal courts of appeal – for the United States, the front line in judicial control of administrative action-made a plea to the lawyers in attendance. Please, he urged, in briefing and arguing cases reviewing agency actions, help us judges to understand their broader contexts. So often, he complained, the briefs and arguments are limited to the particular small issues of the case. We get little sense of the broad context in which it arises – the agency responsibilities in their largest sense, the institutional issues that may be at …
Ascertaining The Parties' Intentions In Arbitral Design, George A. Bermann
Ascertaining The Parties' Intentions In Arbitral Design, George A. Bermann
Faculty Scholarship
Supreme Court case law teaches us that the federal interest in arbitration does not consist of enforcing agreements to arbitrate according to some sort of abstract or ideal arbitral model, but rather according to the particular arbitral model upon which the parties had agreed. This body of law is driven by the same notions of party autonomy that underlie the law of arbitration generally. That parties may agree to forego access to national courts in favor of arbitration is an initial manifestation of that attitude. By logical extension, the parties also enjoy extraordinary latitude in determining the features that "their" …