Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Section 3: The Court And Race Relations, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 2: Moot Court, Piscataway Township Board Of Education V. Taxman, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 4: Criminal Law & Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 1: Overview Of The Supreme Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 8: Federalism: A Court In Search Of Itself, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 6: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Comment: Seminole Tribe V. Florida, Gordon G. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Postscript On Vmi, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Scalia Slugs It Out, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

A Matter of Interpretation
Antonin Scalia, Princeton University Press, 1997, 159 pages, $20

Antonin Scalia, associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, has done more to combat judicial activism than any other living person. Since taking his seat on the High Court in 1986, he has defended and applied a mode of constitutional interpretation - most often called "originalism," sometimes "textualism" - the precise aim of which is to reduce, if not eliminate, judicial lawmaking. Scalia maintains that judges, even Supreme Court Justices, must distinguish what they think law ought to be from what the rule of law in …

Antidisestablishmentarianism: Why Rfra Really Was Unconstitutional, Jed Rubenfeld

Michigan Law Review

Two months ago, the Supreme Court struck down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), handing down its most important church-state decision, and one of its most important federalism decisions, in fifty years. Through RFRA, Congress had prohibited any state actor from "substantially burden[ing] a person's exercise of religion" unless imposing that burden was the "least restrictive means" of furthering "a compelling governmental interest." RFRA was a response to Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, in which the Supreme Court abandoned the very same compelling interest test that RFRA mandated. Smith, overturning decades-old precedent, held …

On-Call Time Under The Fair Labor Standards Act, Eric Phillips

Michigan Law Review

Economic pressures, changing family structures, and technology have increasingly blurred the line between work time and personal time. The rise of independent contracting, the growing number of families in which both parents work, and the. expanding reach of computer networks, fax machines, pagers, and mobile telephones, to provide a few examples, have blurred the once-familiar distinction between work time and leisure time. This distinction is particularly unclear for on-call employees. An on-call employee is one who may be physically away from the workplace but who remains connected to it by telephone, beeper, computer, or radio, and who must respond to …

Loyal Lieutenant, Able Advocate: The Role Of Robert H. Jackson In Franklin D. Roosevelt's Battle With The Supreme Court, Stephen R. Alton

Faculty Scholarship

This Article presents a chronological, narrative account of Jackson's participation in the court fight over Roosevelt's so-called "court packing plan." The larger history of that campaign and its players also are presented in order to illuminate Jackson's role. Although a number of secondary works-both old and new-review the history of the fight, the main purpose here is to relate Jackson's part in this larger history, drawing on. those secondary works only to the extent that they are helpful. This Article first recounts the historical background of the tension between the New Deal and the Supreme Court as well as the …

On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors Paul F. Rothstein, Et. Al., Office Of The President V. Office Of Independent Counsel, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Allen, Margaret A. Berger, William J. Bridge, Paul C. Giannelli, Stephen Gillers, Laird C. Kirkpatrick, David P. Leonard, Miguel A. Mendez, Roger C. Park, Myrna S. Raeder, John W. Reed, Mark Reutlinger, Leo M. Romero, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Peter Tillers

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

This Court should grant review not only because this is a case of national importance and prominence, but also because the decision below is a conspicuous departure from settled principles of evidence law. The panel majority concluded that communications between government lawyers and government officials are not protected by the attorney-client privilege, at least when those communications are sought by a federal grand jury. That conclusion conflicts with the predominant common-law understanding that the attorney-client privilege applies to government entities and that where the privilege applies, it is absolute (i.e., it protects against disclosure in all types of legal and …

Awarding Attorney's Fees To Pro Se Litigants Under Rule 11, Jeremy D. Spector

Michigan Law Review

Among the myriad rules and statutes designed to curb litigation abuse, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") is "the most widely used and most controversial of the sanctions rules." The increased use of Rule ll during the last fifteen years and the recent proliferation of fee-shifting provisions in federal statutes4 have led to an onslaught of motions for attorney's fees in the federal district courts. Simultaneously, these courts are seeing an increasing number of pro se litigants appear before them. The confluence of these two trends has produced the seemingly paradoxical result of pro se parties …

The "Solely Criminal Purpose" Defense To The Enforcement Of Irs Summonses, Darius J. Mehraban

Michigan Law Review

Recent years have witnessed a gradual erosion of the practical distinctions between the civil and criminal investigations performed by federal administrative agencies. This trend arose naturally from a growing number of federal statutes and regulations that carry both civil and criminal penalties for their violation. Administrative agencies today wield investigative summons power almost as expansive as the grand jury subpoena power and can use that power to investigate without first deciding whether criminal or civil liability ultimately will be sought. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has participated to some extent in this intermingling of civil and criminal inquiry - with …

Suspect Linkage: The Interplay Of State Taxing And Spending Measures In The Application Of Constitutional Antidiscrimination Rules, Dan T. Coenen, Walter Hellerstein

Michigan Law Review

This article examines an important and recurring question that courts frequently resolve, but rarely analyze: whether taxing and spending measures should be viewed together when a state imposes a nondiscriminatory tax but also affords relief to some taxpayers through government spending. The answer to this question will often determine whether the state's actions violate constitutional strictures against discriminatory taxation. The taxing measure and the spending measure will generally pass muster if viewed in isolation. After all, courts rarely invalidate nondiscriminatory taxing measures on constitutional grounds. And true government spending measures, if considered alone, plainly fall outside the reach of constitutional …

The Immovable Object Versus The Irresistable Force: Rethinking The Relationship Between Secured Credit And Bankruptcy Policy, Lawrence Ponoroff, F. Stephen Knippenberg

Michigan Law Review

The last leaf in O. Henry's classic short story was hanging by a delicate thread, but it never fell. It never fell, of course, because it wasn't real; Old Behrman had painted it (and caught pneumonia for his trouble) in order to give Johnsy the will to live. The Supreme Court's decision in Dewsnup v. Timm is also hanging by a thread, following a barrage of scholarly criticism and more than four years of limiting case law and legislative incursions on the case's core conceptual rationale. But the holding in Dewsnup, unlike the last leaf, is very real. It has …

Loyal Lieutenant, Able Advocate: The Role Of Robert H. Jackson In Franklin D Roosevelt's Battle With The Supreme Court, Stephen R. Alton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Before his appointment to the Supreme Court, Justice Robert H. Jackson played a highly visible role in Franklin D. Roosevelt's failed "court packing plan. " Roosevelt's legislation would have increased the size of the Supreme Court and could have dramatically altered the functioning of our government. Jackson supported the plan from his post as Assistant Attorney General. This Article uses a chronological narrative to examine Jackson's role in Roosevelt's court fight. The Article examines his role in light of the surrounding history and the tension between the backers of the New Deal and the Supreme Court. Jackson's testimony before the …

An Implied Cause Of Action Under The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Chris Sagers

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This Note contends that consumers should have a private damages action under section 10. Part I discusses the method federal courts currently employ to determine whether a private cause of action should be recognized under a given federal statute. Part II applies this standard to section 10, and it argues that, although the federal courts currently exhibit a fairly restrictive attitude toward implication of remedies, an action should be implied under section 10 because the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 (RESPA) was enacted at a time when Congress relied on a more permissive judicial implication doctrine. Finally, Part …

An Implied Cause Of Action Under The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Christopher L. Sagers

Michigan Law Review

John and Janet lived for most of their early years together in a townhouse in Manhattan. It was a rental, a two-story walk-up on the Upper West Side with barely enough room for the two of them, and it ate up most of their income so that they were barely able to save anything. "Wait a minute," John said one day, "we're paying almost as much for this dump as we'd pay for a mortgage on a nice house!" So the two of them looked over their finances. Not much there. A few thousand and a 401(k) at Janet's work. …

The Unwelcome Judicial Obligation To Respect Politics In Racial Gerrymandering Remedies, Jeffrey L. Fisher

Michigan Law Review

Like it or not, the attack on "bizarrely" shaped majority-minority electoral districts is now firmly underway. Nearly four years have passed since the Supreme Court first announced in Shaw v. Reno that a state's redistricting plan that is "so extremely irregular on its face that it rationally can be viewed only as an effort to segregate the races for purposes of voting" may violate the Equal Protection Clause. Such a district, the Court held, reinforces racial stereotypes, carries us further from the goal of a political system in which race no longer matters, and "threatens to undermine our system of …

The Supreme Court, Visibility, And The "Politics Of Presence", Kathryn Abrams

Vanderbilt Law Review

Jane Schacter has made a critical contribution by elaborating the meaning and potential consequences of the Court's holding in Romer v. Evans. At the center of her account is the thought-provoking suggestion that the Court's opinion enables a visibility or "presence" for gays and lesbians in the extended realm of the "political." While I salute her illumination, I am less certain about whether to share her optimism. In this Comment, I will explore the latter question by looking beyond the decision in Romer to other cases involving group-based civil rights. I will probe the effects of Supreme Court decisionmaking on …

Neutral Principles: A Retrospective, Barry Friedman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Once upon a time, Enlightenment ideals prevailed across the land. Neutrality, objectivity, and reason were accepted as the firmaments of Supreme Court decisionmaking. "Americans tend[ed] to believe that 'playing fair' [meant] making everyone play by the same rules, and any deviation from this definition [was] immediately suspect."' But "then, some scholars.., abandoned the fundamental aspiration toward. . . neutrality in government." "Neutrality" came to be "considered a chimera, an illusion used by those in power to justify and perpetuate existing hierarchies." The nation was threatened with a return to pre-Enlightenment days, a "return to a world in which it matters …

The Casey Standard For Evaluating Facial Attacks On Abortion Statutes, John Christopher Ford

Michigan Law Review

Since the Supreme Court declared in 1973 that the Constitution grants women a limited right to an abortion, the Justices have decided abortion cases with reference to such weighty matters as religious freedom, the disadvantaged position of women in society, and the proper role of the judiciary. Understandably, the Supreme Court's writings on abortion deal extensively with these large themes. The Court, and certainly others, view abortion cases as rivaling Brown v. Board of Education in their importance to the nation. While the Court has focused on the big issues, however, it has neglected an equally important, if less emotionally …

Restoring Rights To Rites: The Religious Motivation Test And The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Steven C. Seeger

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that the religious motivation test best secures the religious liberty guaranteed by the Constitution and the RFRA. Part I examines the text and legislative history of the Act and establishes that Congress intended to protect religiously motivated practices. Part II argues that the free exercise case law prior to Smith, to which the RFRA explicitly appeals, did not require litigants to prove centrality or compulsion. Part III demonstrates that the religious motivation test protects the full spectrum of religious practices and religious groups, unlike the centrality test and the compulsion test. Part IV illustrates that the motivation …

Critical Race Praxis: Race Theory And Political Lawyering Practice In Post-Civil Rights America, Eric K. Yamamoto

Michigan Law Review

At the end of the twentieth century, the legal status of Chinese Americans in San Francisco's public schools turns on a requested judicial finding that a desegregation order originally designed to dismantle a system subordinating nonwhites now invidiously discriminates against Chinese Americans. Brian Ho, Patrick Wong, and Hilary Chen, plaintiffs in Ho v. San Francisco Unified School District, represent "all [16,000] children of Chinese descent" eligible to attend San Francisco's public schools. Their high-profile suit, filed by small-firm attorneys, challenges the validity of a 1983 judicial consent decree desegregating San Francisco's schools. Approved in response to an NAACP class action …

In Defense Of Language, The Supreme Court And Congress: A Reply To Professor Chemerinsky, Laura B. Bartell

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Establishment Clause: The Perspective Of Constitutional Litigation, Robert A. Sedler

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Doma: An Unconstitutional Establishment Of Fundamentalist Christianity, James M. Donovan

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

According to the text of the Act, DOMA's purposes are "to define and protect the institution of marriage," where marriage is defined to exclude same-sex partners. To be constitutionally valid under the Establishment Clause, this notion that heterosexual marriages require "protection" from gay and lesbian persons must spring from a secular and not religious source. This Article posits that DOMA has crossed this forbidden line between the secular and the religious. DOMA, motivated and supported by fundamentalist Christian ideology, and lacking any genuine secular goals or justifications, betrays the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Justice George Sutherland And Economic Liberty: Constitutional Conservatism And The Problem Of Factions, 6 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1 (1997), Samuel R. Olken

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

Most scholars have viewed Justice George Sutherland as a conservative jurist who opposed government regulation because of his adherence to laissez-faire economics and Social Darwinism, or because of his devotion to natural rights. In this Article, Professor Olken analyzes these widely held misperceptions of Justice Sutherland's economic liberty jurisprudence, which was based not on socio-economic theory, but on historical experience and common law. Justice Sutherland, consistent with the judicial conservatism of the Lochner era, wanted to protect individual rights from the whims of political factions and changing democratic majorities. The Lochner era differentiation between government regulations enacted for the public …