Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Four Maurer School Of Law Students Selected As 2023 Stevens Fellows, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

Four Indiana Law students have been selected as Stevens Fellows, the John Paul Stevens Foundation accounced today (June 20). Selection as a Stevens Fellow allows students to receive critical financial support while participating in unpaid summer legal internships serving the public interest.

Named after the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice, the John Paul Stevens Foundation is dedicated to promoting public interest and social justice values in the next generation of American lawyers.

“You Don’T Bring Me Flowers Anymore”: President Clinton, Paula Jones, And Why Courts Should Expand The Definition Of “Adverse Employment Action” Under Title Vii’S Anti-Retaliation Provision, Lawrence Rosenthal

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Anti-discrimination statutes such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) prohibit discrimination based on individuals’ protected characteristics. In addition to prohibiting this type of status-based discrimination, these statutes also prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who assert their rights under the statutes or who assist others in asserting their rights.

Over the past several years, retaliation charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) have made up an increasingly high percentage of all charges filed with the agency. Specifically, …

The New Dread, Part Ii: The Judicial Overthrow Of The Reasonableness Standard In Police Shooting, Kindaka J. Sanders

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article series argues that the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on excessive force from Graham v. Connor to the present has undermined the objectivity of the reasonableness standard. In its place, the Court has erected a standard that reflects modern conservative political ideology, including race conservatism, law and order, increased police discretion, and the deconstruction of the Warren Court’s expansion of civil rights and civil liberties. Indeed, the Court, dominated by law-and-order conservatives, is one of the greatest triumphs of conservatism. Modern conservatism developed as a backlash against various social movements like the Civil Rights Movement and spontaneous urban rebellions during …

In Pursuit Of A Modern Standard: The Constitutional Proportions Of Collateral Harm From Pursuits And Police High-Speed Driving, Julian Gilbert

Cleveland State Law Review

Police chases and high-speed driving are common practices that pose a substantial amount of harm and are often unjustified. The benefits of such chases are questionable, and rapid police action at all costs is often unnecessary. When bystanders are injured as a result of police high-speed driving, there are few avenues to have their rights vindicated, and federal court cases require plaintiffs to meet an almost impossible burden. However, under the United States Supreme Court case of County of Sacramento v. Lewis, a plaintiff can put forth evidence that their substantive due process right to life under the Fourteenth …

Abort The Court? How Abortion Jurisprudence Has Highlighted Questions Surrounding The Legitimacy Of The Supreme Court, Junia E. Paulus

Honors Projects

The Supreme Court is often viewed with awe and the justices treated with reverence. It is the highest court in the United States, tasked with interpreting the law. But is the Supreme Court the neutral arbiter of justice it purports to be? Most recently, the 2022 ruling on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned the fifty-year precedent of Roe v. Wade, causing the Court to face increasing scrutiny and questions of its legitimacy. I conduct a philosophical analysis of the arguments made by the justices in the opinions on Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and …

Change We Can Believe In: The Seventh Circuit's Exposure Of Inadequate Environmental Review In Protect Our Parks V. Buttigieg, P. Nicholas Greco

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

On The Fence About Immigration And Overpopulation: "Environmentalists" Challenge Dhs Policies On Nepa Basis In Whitewater Draw Natural Resource Conservation District V. Mayorkas, Maya J. Williams

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Proportionality V. Categorization: The Issue Of Judicial Balancing Of Rights, Akram Mohamed

Theses and Dissertations

The fact that there is a constant conflict between individual rights and state or social interests has historically provoked the question of how to balance or harmonize such conflicting interests? On what basis shall the legislator or the judge decide in favor of this or that right in his legislation or judgement? Where shall we, for example, draw the line between the right to freedom of expression and the right to protect one’s honor and reputation? How could the legislator find the compromise between the state duty to protect fetus life and its obligation not to interfere with woman’s right …

The Nagging In Our Ears And Original Public Meaning, Perry Dane

Marquette Law Review

The debate over how to understand the meaning of legal texts once pitted intentionalism against a variety of other views united by the conviction that a legal enactment takes on a meaning not reducible to anybody’s mental state. Both these approaches are supported by powerful intuitions. This Article does not try to referee between them. Instead, it takes aim at a third set of views— theories of “original public meaning”—that in recent decades has upended the traditional debate and has now become gospel for the new majority on the United States Supreme Court.

Oklahoma V. Castro-Huerta, Jurisdictional Overlap, Competitive Sovereign Erosion, And The Fundamental Freedom Of Sovereign Nations, Michael D.O. Rusco

Marquette Law Review

In addition to its stunning internal flaws, the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta exemplifies Indian law’s broader flaws as a jurisprudence. Castro-Huerta holds that states have concurrent criminal jurisdiction with federal and tribal governments over crimes by non-Indians against Indians on reservation lands. Justice Gorsuch deftly addresses many of the glaring internal flaws in Kavanaugh’s majority opinion, but not all. He does not dissect the hollow assertion that reservations are part of the surrounding state both geographically and politically. This cannot go unaddressed, particularly given its weak analysis, misguided use of precedent, and broader consequences.

#Nofilter: How Discovery Filter Teams Breach Privilege Rights And Why They Require Stricter Regulation, Kelly Murray

The Global Business Law Review

This note examines the Supreme Court’s substantial need to weigh in on how filter teams should be used given current circuit splits and identifies several best practices to remedy the issues they currently present. Part I discusses the principal issues for which filter teams are scrutinized. Namely, numerous district courts hold that filter teams provide the government with the unfair advantage of determining which materials from their opposing counsel are privileged. This often leads to an overly broad inclusion of privileged documents, which can violate defendants’ Sixth Amendment rights to a fair and complete trial. Some courts even go so …

Reimagining Financial Whistleblower Protection: A Proposal For Stronger Protection Under The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Matthew J. Gilligan

Brooklyn Law Review

Whistleblowers occupy a unique place in American society. They operate in nearly every sphere of modern life, exposing unlawful conduct by financial institutions, technology companies, and government entities, just to name a few. When whistleblowers encounter retaliatory behavior, they are faced with an uphill battle to hold their employer accountable. This note discusses the circuit split regarding whistleblower protections under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was recently granted cert by the US Supreme Court. Until recently, no circuit required whistleblowers suing their employers for engaging in retaliatory behavior to show that the employer acted with retaliatory intent. The Second Circuit broke …

There Is No Bruen Step Zero: The Law-Abiding Citizen And The Second Amendment, Jeff Campbell

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 1 the Supreme Court transformed Second Amendment law by adopting an originalist approach in gun-rights cases. Breaking from its previous cases, the Court recognized an individual right to bear arms, at least within the home.2 The Court’s method, while not fully specified, focused on history to determine the meaning of the Second Amendment. 3 But despite the abrupt change in the law, the anticipated revolution never really came. Lower courts turned away nearly every challenge to existing gun laws, sometimes by declining to extend Heller outside the home,4 sometimes by finding that the laws …

Justice Ginsburg's Journey To Dissents And Influence On Reproductive Rights, Songo Wawa

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s advocacy for gender equity, evidenced by her nationally famous dissents, began long before her 27 years on the Supreme Court. Prior to becoming a Supreme Court Justice, Attorney Ginsburg’s early experiences of gender inequity led to her advocacy for women’s rights as a law professor and as co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project. 1 Attorney Ginsburg’s legal strategy encompassed her pragmatic approach to voicing her opinions about gender equality. 2 In Gonzales v. Carhart, both her dissent announcement and written dissent demonstrated Justice Ginsburg’s commitment to women’s reproductive autonomy.3 Without Justice Ginsburg’s …

Limiting 28 U.S.C. § 1782: A Changed Landscape For Discovery In Private Commercial Arbitration Abroad, Jazmyne R. Barto

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

For decades 28 U.S.C. § 1782 has been used by foreign entities looking to compel discovery in the United States for use in commercial arbitration proceedings abroad. Despite the statute being in force since 1948, many federal courts were unsure of whether § 1782 could actually be used in international private commercial arbitration. The Supreme Court tried and failed to clarify the statute’s scope in 2004, leading to a circuit court split as to §1782’s applicability. Looking to end the controversy once and for all, during the Summer of 2022, the Supreme Court clearly stated that § 1782 might not …

The Fugazi Second Amendment: Bruen's Text, History, And Tradition Problem And How To Fix It, Patrick J. Charles

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article critiques the Supreme Court’s use of text, history, and tradition in New York Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. In doing so, not only is the Supreme Court’s approach to history-in-law in Bruen called into question, but also the Article provides the courts with an historically objective and even-keeled ‘way-ahead’ for future Second Amendment cases and controversies.

Alexander Hamilton And Administrative Law: How America's First Great Public Administrator Informs And Challenges Our Understanding Of Contemporary Administrative Law, Rodger D. Citron

Cleveland State Law Review

Alexander Hamilton’s recognition and reputation have soared since the premiere of "Hamilton," Lin-Manuel Miranda’s musical about him in 2015. For lawyers, Hamilton’s work on the Federalist Papers and service as the nation’s first Treasury Secretary likely stand out more than other aspects of his extraordinary life. Politics and economics were fundamental concerns addressed by the Framers in a number of ways, including what we now refer to as administrative law—the laws and procedures that guide government departments (or, as we say today, agencies). Indeed, "Hamilton" reminds us that questions of administration and administrative law have been with us since the …

Sacred Spheres: Religious Autonomy As An International Human Right, Diana V. Thomson, Kayla A. Toney

Catholic University Law Review

How should courts resolve thorny human rights disputes that arise within religious groups? According to an emerging international consensus, they shouldn’t. When a case involves sensitive internal decisions by a religious organization, such as choosing who is qualified to teach the faith, courts are increasingly taking a hands-off approach. This global consensus has formed across international treaties, tribunals, and domestic courts in European and American nations. Every major human rights instrument and many international and domestic courts recognize that religious freedom must extend to religious communities, especially houses of worship and schools where believers gather to practice their faith and …

Abortion In America After Roe: An Examination Of The Impact Of Dobbs V. Jackson Women’S Health Organization On Women’S Reproductive Health Access, Natalie Maria Caffrey

Senior Theses and Projects

This thesis will examine the limitations in access to abortion and other necessary reproductive healthcare in states that are hostile to abortion rights, as well as discuss the ongoing litigation within those states between pro-choice and pro-life advocates. After analyzing the legal landscape and the different abortion laws within these states, this thesis will focus on the practical consequences of Dobbs on women’s lives, with particular attention to its impact on women of color and poor women in states with the most restrictive laws. The effect of these restrictive laws on poor women will be felt disproportionately due to their …

Drug Ideologies Of The United States, Macy Montgomery

Helm's School of Government Conference

The United States has been increasingly creating lenient drug policies. Seventeen states and Washington, the District of Columbia, legalized marijuana, and Oregon decriminalized certain drugs, including methamphetamine, heroin, and cocaine. The medical community has proven that drugs, including marijuana, have myriad adverse health side effects. This leads to two questions: Why does the United States government continue to create lenient drug policies, and what reasons do citizens give for legalizing drugs when the medical community has proven them harmful? The paper hypothesizes that the disadvantages of drug legalization outweigh its benefits because of the numerous harms it causes, such as …