Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Supreme Court of the United States Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

7,878 Full-Text Articles 5,483 Authors 5,937,957 Downloads 162 Institutions

All Articles in Supreme Court of the United States

Faceted Search

7,878 full-text articles. Page 222 of 239.

Safe Haven No Longer: The Role Of Georgia Courts And Private Probation Companies In Sustaining A De Facto Debtors' Prison System, Sarah D. Bellacicco 2013 University of Georgia School of Law

Safe Haven No Longer: The Role Of Georgia Courts And Private Probation Companies In Sustaining A De Facto Debtors' Prison System, Sarah D. Bellacicco

Georgia Law Review

Georgia was specifically established as a colony for debtors-a haven where they could be safe from imprisonment. It is a haven no longer. Georgia courts are regularly imprisoning people for failing to pay debts, often through probation revocation of probationers who have failed to pay a fine or fee imposed as a condition of probation. Some of these probationers are on probation solely because they could not pay a fine on the day of sentencing, a practice which greatly increases the amount they owe due to the additional probation fees imposed. In Bearden v. Georgia, the Supreme Court held that …


One Voice Or Many: The Political Question Doctrine And Acoustic Dissonance In Foreign Affairs, Daniel Abebe 2013 Columbia Law School

One Voice Or Many: The Political Question Doctrine And Acoustic Dissonance In Foreign Affairs, Daniel Abebe

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the merits of the one-voice presumption of the political question doctrine. It has two goals. First, it aims to unpack the underlying assumptions supporting a presumption in favor of one voice in foreign affairs to determine the conditions under which the presumption holds. The traditional account about speaking with one voice focuses on the benefits of centralizing decision making in foreign affairs. The creation of foreign policy and the provision of national security, among other things, are public goods best provided by the national government, rather than the states. Relative to the national government, the states are …


When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl 2013 William & Mary Law School

When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Marriage Grants: Article Iii & Same-Sex Marriage, Neal Devins, Tara Leigh Grove 2012 William & Mary Law School

Commentary On Marriage Grants: Article Iii & Same-Sex Marriage, Neal Devins, Tara Leigh Grove

Popular Media

No abstract provided.


Youngstown Sheet To Boumediene: A Story Of Judicial Ethos And The (Un)Fastidious Use Of Language, Laura A. Cisneros 2012 Golden Gate University School of Law

Youngstown Sheet To Boumediene: A Story Of Judicial Ethos And The (Un)Fastidious Use Of Language, Laura A. Cisneros

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Incredible Shrinking Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin 2012 William & Mary Law School

The Incredible Shrinking Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Sharp turns in the Supreme Court’s recent Confrontation Clause jurisprudence have left scholars reeling from conflicting emotions: exhilaration, despair, denial, and soon, perhaps, cynical acceptance. While most commentators celebrated the demise of the incoherent Ohio v. Roberts framework, their excitement largely faded as the Court’s decisions in Davis v. Washington and Bryant v. Michigan revealed nascent flaws in the evolving doctrine and sharply curtailed the newly revitalized confrontation right.

Recent scholarship strives to reanimate the jurisprudence by expanding the doctrinal definition of “testimonial” statements – the sole form of evidence that the Court now recognizes as implicating the Confrontation Clause. …


The Mosaic Theory Of The Fourth Amendment, Orin S. Kerr 2012 George Washington University Law School

The Mosaic Theory Of The Fourth Amendment, Orin S. Kerr

Michigan Law Review

In the Supreme Court's recent decision on GPS surveillance, United States v. Jones, five justices authored or joined concurring opinions that applied a new approach to interpreting Fourth Amendment protection. Before Jones, Fourth Amendment decisions had always evaluated each step of an investigation individually. Jones introduced what we might call a "mosaic theory" of the Fourth Amendment, by which courts evaluate a collective sequence of government activity as an aggregated whole to consider whether the sequence amounts to a search. This Article considers the implications of a mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment. It explores the choices and puzzles that …


Issue 1: Annual Survey 2012 Table Of Contents, 2012 University of Richmond

Issue 1: Annual Survey 2012 Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Brief Of Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law Tax Clinic As Amicus Curiae In Support Of The Respondents, Carlton M. Smith 2012 Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Brief Of Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law Tax Clinic As Amicus Curiae In Support Of The Respondents, Carlton M. Smith

Amicus Briefs

The Cardozo Tax Clinic represents, for free, low-income taxpayers with respect to their federal income tax matters – both before the Internal Revenue Service and in the federal courts. Occasionally, the Clinic’s assistance has been sought after those individuals, on their own, filed a document late – either with the IRS or the courts -- under a time deadline set out in the Internal Revenue Code or in a regulation promulgated thereunder. Usually, no extraordinary equitable reasons occurred that might excuse such late filing. See, e.g., Iljazi v. Commissioner, T.C. Summary Op. 2010-59 (client simply filed administrative claim for …


Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger 2012 University of Baltimore School of Law

Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

Does stare decisis constrain the expansion of constitutional doctrine? Does existing precedent preclude the Supreme Court from expanding a criminal defendant’s right to exculpatory evidence? While commentators frequently clash on when stare decisis should prevent the Court from overruling its own precedents, the question of when fidelity to precedent should inhibit doctrinal expansion is surprisingly under-theorized. This Article begins to fill this gap through an in-depth case study of stare decisis and the expansion of criminal due process doctrine.

This Article analyzes the longstanding constitutional dialectic between procedural and substantive schools of criminal due process. Focus is on Brady v. …


Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen 2012 William & Mary Law School

Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


A Financial Economic Theory Of Punitive Damages, Robert J. Rhee 2012 University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

A Financial Economic Theory Of Punitive Damages, Robert J. Rhee

Michigan Law Review

This Article provides a financial economic theory of punitive damages. The core problem, as the Supreme Court acknowledged in Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, is not the systemic amount of punitive damages in the tort system; rather it is the risk of outlier outcomes. Low frequency, high severity awards are unpredictable, cause financial distress, and beget social cost. By focusing only on offsetting escaped liability, the standard law and economics theory fails to account for the core problem of variance. This Article provides a risk arbitrage analysis of the relationship between variance, litigation valuation, and optimal deterrence. Starting with settlement …


Section 2: Roberts Court, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

Section 2: Roberts Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 7: Gay Rights, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

Section 7: Gay Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 1: Moot Court: Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

Section 1: Moot Court: Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 5: Business, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

Section 5: Business, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 4: International Law, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

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

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 3: Election Law, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

Section 3: Election Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Section 6: Criminal, Institute of Bill of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School 2012 William & Mary Law School

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

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.


Supplemental Brief Of Professors Anthony J. Bellia Jr. And Bradford R. Clark As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Christopher J. Paolella, Anthony J. Bellia 2012 Reich & Paolella, LLP

Supplemental Brief Of Professors Anthony J. Bellia Jr. And Bradford R. Clark As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Christopher J. Paolella, Anthony J. Bellia

Court Briefs

No. 10-1491
Esther Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Cour of Appeals for the Second Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

This case squarely presents the question whether ATS jurisdiction extends to claims solely between aliens. The plaintiffs and defendants are all aliens; no U.S. citizen or corporation has ever been a party to the case. Because the issue of party alignment under the ATS is a question of subject matter jurisdiction, the parties cannot waive it, and either the Court or a party may raise it anytime. And the question whether …


Digital Commons powered by bepress