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 (3236)
- Courts (2066)
- Judges (1464)
- State and Local Government Law (1301)
- Jurisprudence (1139)
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1049)
- Legal History (981)
- First Amendment (960)
- Criminal Procedure (948)
- Legislation (883)
- Law and Politics (867)
- Criminal Law (857)
- Fourteenth Amendment (701)
- Administrative Law (669)
- Law and Society (630)
- Law and Race (629)
- Civil Procedure (618)
- Health Law and Policy (507)
- Jurisdiction (501)
- Labor and Employment Law (491)
- Civil Law (480)
- Litigation (479)
- Human Rights Law (475)
- Fourth Amendment (472)
- Religion Law (471)
- International Law (456)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (454)
- Law and Gender (451)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (1618)
- William & Mary Law School (666)
- University of Richmond (466)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (307)
- University of Colorado Law School (287)
-
- Seattle University School of Law (238)
- Notre Dame Law School (205)
- St. John's University School of Law (173)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (157)
- Cleveland State University (134)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (132)
- University of Georgia School of Law (132)
- Universitas Indonesia (121)
- Roger Williams University (112)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (112)
- Brooklyn Law School (111)
- Emory University School of Law (111)
- Fordham Law School (111)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (110)
- New York Law School (104)
- Columbia Law School (99)
- UIC School of Law (96)
- Boston University School of Law (95)
- American University Washington College of Law (93)
- The University of Akron (88)
- Duke Law (86)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (81)
- Georgetown University Law Center (70)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (69)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (69)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (1565)
- Supreme Court (1047)
- Constitution (411)
- Constitutional law (271)
- First Amendment (244)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (205)
- Congress (199)
- Discrimination (187)
- Federalism (184)
- Judicial review (164)
- Due process (154)
- SCOTUS (148)
- Federal (138)
- Police (130)
- Abortion (129)
- Fifth Amendment (126)
- History (121)
- Jurisprudence (117)
- State (116)
- Equal Protection Clause (113)
- Supreme court (113)
- Constitutional Law (112)
- Sixth Amendment (112)
- Race and law (109)
- Statutory interpretation (109)
- Equal protection (106)
- Courts (96)
- Originalism (96)
- Constitutional interpretation (95)
- Fourteenth Amendment (95)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (837)
- Articles (487)
- Faculty Scholarship (400)
- University of Richmond Law Review (394)
- Supreme Court Preview (286)
-
- Touro Law Review (279)
- Faculty Publications (258)
- Publications (258)
- Seattle University Law Review (227)
- Faculty Articles (126)
- "Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI (121)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (114)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (96)
- Scholarly Articles (89)
- William & Mary Law Review (89)
- Akron Law Review (81)
- All Faculty Scholarship (81)
- Journal Articles (78)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (75)
- Court Briefs (67)
- Cleveland State Law Review (66)
- Georgia Law Review (66)
- UIC Law Review (65)
- Scholarly Works (64)
- Law Faculty Publications (61)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (60)
- Northwestern University Law Review (59)
- St. John's Law Review (59)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (56)
- Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar (54)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 6481 - 6510 of 7916
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Advice And Consent: Ensuring Judicial Freedom, Patrick J. Leahy
Advice And Consent: Ensuring Judicial Freedom, Patrick J. Leahy
University of Richmond Law Review
Throughout this nation's history, Americans have turned to the Supreme Court to protect their rights against excesses of the legislative and executive branches. To protect this crucial role of the Court, the Framers realized that neither the executive nor the legislature should have the power to cast the Court in its own image. To prevent this usurpation of one branch by another, the Framers wisely required the President to obtain the advice and consent of the Senate in making appointments to the Supreme Court.
Enterprise And American Law 1836-1937. By Herbert Hovenkamp. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press, 1991., Barry Cushman
Enterprise And American Law 1836-1937. By Herbert Hovenkamp. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press, 1991., Barry Cushman
Journal Articles
Book review of Enterprise and American Law 1836-1937 by Herbert Hovenkamp. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991
The Role Of The Modern Supreme Court, Ronald D. Rotunda
The Role Of The Modern Supreme Court, Ronald D. Rotunda
University of Richmond Law Review
In The FederalistNo. 78, Alexander Hamilton examined the judicial department. He relied on that branch to safeguard the limitations drafted into the Constitution. While the judiciary is "incontestably" and "beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power," he conceded, nonetheless, the constitutional limitations on legislative excess "can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice; whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the constitution void."
Judiciary: Know Thy Place, Thomas L. Jipping
Judiciary: Know Thy Place, Thomas L. Jipping
University of Richmond Law Review
Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist No.78 that the judiciary "has no influence over ... the purse."' Yet in Missouri v. Jenkins, the Supreme Court approved indirect judicial taxation. Hamilton wrote that the judiciary "will always be the least dangerous" and "beyond comparison the weakest" branch of government. Yet in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court created out of nothing a right to choose abortion, invalidated the abortion laws of all fifty states developed over more than a century, and shut millions of Americans out of the process of developing public policy on this important political issue. Hamilton wrote that …
A Mirror For The Magistrate, Paul Campos
Divided Justice: A Commentary On The Nomination And Confirmation Of Justice Thomas, Michael J. Gerhardt
Divided Justice: A Commentary On The Nomination And Confirmation Of Justice Thomas, Michael J. Gerhardt
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court, Liberty, And Abortion, George J. Annas
The Supreme Court, Liberty, And Abortion, George J. Annas
Faculty Scholarship
Abortion has aroused intense personal and political passions for almost two decades in the United States, and demeaning sloganeering has long substituted for reasoned discourse. Just as few people have actually read the 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade, few people who have expressed their opinion on the Supreme Court's ruling in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, which has been condemned by activists on both sides of the debate about abortion rights, have read it. In one poll, however, more than 70 percent of Americans agreed with the restrictions upheld by the Court as they understood …
Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey
Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey
Faculty Articles
When Warren Burger was appointed Chief Justice in 1969, he was expected to lead the Supreme Court away from its liberal, value-laden approach to constitutional adjudication. Indeed, a retrospective of the court’s work during the seventeen years Warren Burger served as Chief Justice reveals the expected conservative trend of the Chief Justice himself, as well as the Supreme Court generally. It does not, however, reflect wholesale rejection of the most controversial civil liberties decisions rendered by the Warren Court. It is also unclear that Chief Justice Burger was responsible for the Court’s retrenchment on civil liberties where it did occur. …
Germany's Legal Protection For Women Workers Vis-À-Vis Illegal Employment Discrimination In The United States: A Comparative Perspective In Light Of Johnson Controls, Carol D. Rasnic
Michigan Journal of International Law
This article will review the major German laws affecting women in the workplace, including clarification of the rationales of the German Bundestag (parliament). Comparative remarks regarding U.S. law and an analysis of Johnson Controls will place the two bodies of law in juxtaposition. Finally, an explanatory historical overview will allow the reader to draw his or her own conclusions as to the preferred view of the legal status of the working woman.
Extraterritoriality Of Restrictive State Abortion Laws: States Can Abort Plans To Abort At Home But Not Abroad, Andrew King-Ries
Extraterritoriality Of Restrictive State Abortion Laws: States Can Abort Plans To Abort At Home But Not Abroad, Andrew King-Ries
Faculty Law Review Articles
The question of a state's authority to legislate abortion extraterritorially may appear largely academic because of the United States Supreme Court's holding in Roe v. Wade, in which the Court prohibited states from restricting abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy.' At first glance, the Supreme Court's recent decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey' appears to remove further the issue of extraterritorial abortion legislation from the states because the decision purportedly reaffirmed Roe.3 The Casey decision, however, does not preclude returning the abortion issue to the states. An extremely tenuous coalition of justices reaffirmed Roe, while a united group of …
The Supreme Court: Final Arbiter Of Our Nation's Legal Disputes, Strom Thurmond
The Supreme Court: Final Arbiter Of Our Nation's Legal Disputes, Strom Thurmond
University of Richmond Law Review
"I have had the opportunity to review twenty-three Supreme Court nominations during my thirty-seven years in the Senate."
The Role Of The Supreme Court, Charles E. Grassley
The Role Of The Supreme Court, Charles E. Grassley
University of Richmond Law Review
Many people think of the Supreme Court exclusively as a place to safeguard individual rights. Without question, this is an important duty of the Court. However, the Supreme Court serves many other institutional functions as well. These crucial responsibilities are often overlooked, not only by the public, but by those who closely watch the Supreme Court at work.
The Supreme Court's Role: Guarantor Of Individual And Minority Group Rights, Nadine Strossen
The Supreme Court's Role: Guarantor Of Individual And Minority Group Rights, Nadine Strossen
University of Richmond Law Review
We have just celebrated the Bicentennial of the United States Bill of Rights, a marvelous document that not only has been used to secure a broad range of freedoms for many people in this country, but also has inspired and served as a model for liberty-loving peoples the world over. However, the freedoms enunciated in the Bill of Rights - as well as in other Constitutional provisions - are not self-enforcing.
Conservative Supreme Court: Its Impact On Traditional Values, Donald E. Wildman, Benjamin W. Bull
Conservative Supreme Court: Its Impact On Traditional Values, Donald E. Wildman, Benjamin W. Bull
University of Richmond Law Review
Most court watchers agree that the changing composition of the Supreme Court will ineluctably favor the interests of traditional values organizations like the American Family Association. The next decade will surely see the Court return to a more balanced approach in line with the preservation of family values. Certainly some will characterize the new Court as more conservative. To the extent that it will emphasize core principles in the Constitution as the bedrock from which it must proceed, it will be conservative. Yet this is simply a return of the Court to its intended function: interpretation and application of law …
The Supreme Court: New Hope For The Restoration Of Federalism, Beverly Lahaye, Ellen O. Smith
The Supreme Court: New Hope For The Restoration Of Federalism, Beverly Lahaye, Ellen O. Smith
University of Richmond Law Review
The recent philosdphical shift of the Supreme Court toward a more restrained or "conservative" approach to constitutional adjudication brings with it hope for the revitalization of federalism as a constitutional and political principle.
Balancing The Federal Judiciary, Anne Bryant
Balancing The Federal Judiciary, Anne Bryant
University of Richmond Law Review
Since the American Association of University Women first published the associational brief "Balancing the Federal Judiciary" in 1988, two new Associate Justices (David Souter and Clarence Thomas) have joined the Supreme Court. The Court has continued to chip away at the rights of women and minorities, with damaging decisions in areas such as reproductive rights (e.g., Webster v. Reproductive Health Services) and employment discrimination(e.g., Wards Cove Packing Company v. Atonio). With a conservative majority in place on the Supreme Court until well into the next century and Reagan and Bush appointees comprising more than half of the nation's federal judges, …
Reagan, Bush And The Supreme Court, Arthur J. Kropp
Reagan, Bush And The Supreme Court, Arthur J. Kropp
University of Richmond Law Review
What may be the most significant achievement of the Reagan-Bush years is one we have only begun to appreciate: the radical revolution in the federal courts. After nearly three terms of conservative presidents bent on remaking the federal judiciary, the courts have been transformed. They are far more conservative, and, despite Administration rhetoric to the contrary, decidedly more activist.