Remaking the United States Supreme Court in the Courts’ of Appeals Image Draft (January 2009 Version)
نویسندگان
چکیده
Introduction I. The Case for Capacity A. Clarity B. Consistency C. Checks and Balances D. Summary II. Proposal to Expand Court Capacity A. Expand the Court 1. Size 2. Implementation B. Adopt Panel Decisionmaking C. Retain Limited En Banc Review III. Proposal Pros and Cons A. Potential Benefits 1. Credible Threat of Review 2. Entry and Exit 3. Court Composition 4. Court Cohesion 5. Judicial Education B. Potential Costs 1. Legitimacy 2. Decision Quality 3. Induced Cert Conclusion
منابع مشابه
Resolving Amicus Curiae Motions in the Third Circuit and Beyond
Amicus curiae briefs are deeply woven into the fabric of modern federal appellate practice. Indeed, amici curiae submit briefs in approximately ninety percent of the cases that the United States Supreme Court entertains, and the Justices deny a minuscule number of amicus requests to participate. Amicus practice is less ubiquitous in the United States Courts of Appeals. Amici seek to file compar...
متن کاملThe Supreme Court and physician-assisted suicide--the ultimate right.
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide later this year whether to let stand decisions by two appeals courts permitting doctors to help terminally ill patients commit suicide. The Ninth and Second Circuit Courts of Appeals last spring held that state laws in Washington and New York that ban assistance in suicide were unconstitutional as applied to doctors and their dying patients. If the Supreme Cou...
متن کاملJon O. Newman and the abortion decisions: a remarkable first year.
Jon O. Newman took the oath as a United States District Judge for the District of Connecticut on January 17, 1972. By any reckoning, he had an enormously productive and influential first year. Twice confronted as a member of statutory three-judge courts with cases challenging the constitutionality of Connecticut’s anti-abortion statute, he produced two memorable opinions.1 The first was an inno...
متن کاملPress freedom in the Brazilian Supreme Court: a comparative analysis with the U.S. Supreme Court
This paper analyzes the understanding of the Brazilian Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States about press freedom. The research aims to compare the position of the Courts about this fundamental right. Using the comparative method, it analyzes the arguments used by the courts in trials which had press freedom as its object. The paper also presents a literature review of the Bra...
متن کاملWebster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)
In the 1989 case Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Missouri law regulating abortion [3] care. The Missouri law prohibited the use of public facilities, employees, or funds to provide abortion [3] counseling or services. The law also placed restrictions on physicians who provided abortions. A group of physicians affected by the law ch...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2009