US Supreme Court Commission will consider reforms

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Reform ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Past ◽  
Institutional Integrity ◽  
Raising Awareness ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Concrete Action

Significance Although the Commission represents the most concrete action on Supreme Court reform in decades, the large membership makes it unwieldy and it lacks a clear mandate to offer specific recommendations on reform proposals. Impacts The Commission may have the effect of raising awareness of alternatives beyond expanding the number of justices on the Court. The Court’s size varied in the past but expansion now would bring accusations of court-packing, eroding its institutional integrity. If Justice Stephen Breyer retires this year, Biden could advance a nominee for confirmation by a narrow Senate majority. Biden will continue to feel pressure from the left to re-balance a rightward tilt many perceive in the Court’s membership.

US Supreme Court will generate greater controversy

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Court Reform ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Political Backlash

Significance The decision to hold a hearing on this issue, rather than simply issue a decision, reflects a degree of concern about perceptions of the Court’s legitimacy following the transfer of the country’s currently polarised politics onto the Court through recent appointments. Impacts The conservative majority of the Supreme Court is so dominant that no liberal decisions are likely in the foreseeable future. Chief Justice Roberts will try on occasion to moderate the Court’s conservative decision-making but mostly without effect. The recent report from President Joe Biden’s commission on the Supreme Court will prove ineffectual. Upcoming cases will provoke a political backlash among voters and make Court reform a central preoccupation for some Democrats.

Concern at opaque US Supreme Court rulings grows

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Reform ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Institutional Legitimacy ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Continued Use ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
Legal Consequences

Significance The Court’s institutional legitimacy to interpret and sometimes invalidate laws affecting major issues may be undercut by this resort to procedural shortcuts, as they remove the normal public briefings, arguments and explanations of decisions that underpin the Court's authority. Impacts A Court renowned for its reluctance to upset settled legal expectations is changing law without the use of rigorous procedures. The Court’s legitimacy may be damaged by continued use of unsigned orders that have lasting legal consequences. President Joe Biden’s commission on Supreme Court reform has put the use of the shadow docket on its agenda.

US Supreme Court paves way for more change next term

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Court Reform ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Presidential Commission ◽  
Us Supreme Court

Significance While several cases made headlines, more technical opinions will have greater impact. The Court changed how legal precedents are interpreted without directly overruling them, an approach it may use next term in abortion and gun cases. Impacts The Court will hear cases on gun rights, abortion and possibly affirmative action, next term, all controversial issues. Speculation will continue to over whether Justice Breyer may choose to retire to facilitate his replacement by another liberal. The presidential commission on Supreme Court reform is due to report in the autumn, coinciding with the next Court term.

Converting debt into equity in private limited companies in Thailand

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-123
Author(s):  
Adam Reekie
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Legal Capital ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Past ◽  
Original Intention ◽  
Commercial Code ◽  
Historical Investigation ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the prohibition on debt-to-equity conversions for private limited companies in Thailand, resulting from an interpretation of Section 1119 of the Thai Civil and Commercial Code (TCCC) adopted by academics and the regulator. Design/methodology/approach This paper critically examines the interpretation of Section 1119 of the TCCC made by academics, the Thai Supreme Court and the regulator. Taking an approach, which draws on debate in the EU over the past two decades, this paper presents a new understanding of the rules relating to legal capital in Thailand. This new understanding is applied to challenge the orthodox interpretation of Section 1119. Findings The interpretation proposed by this paper is that debt-to-equity conversions may be permitted when viewed as shares issued in return for payment in kind. This proposed interpretation is consistent with existing Thai Supreme Court jurisprudence. In addition, a close reading of the provision, further supported by a historical investigation into the legislative drafting process, reveals that it reflects the original intention behind this provision. Originality/value This paper presents a view of Thai legal capital rules, which challenges the orthodox understanding of their nature, purpose and categorisation. Furthermore, the proposed interpretation of Section 1119 of the TCCC, if adopted by the regulator, would permit Thai private limited companies to engage in debt-to-equity swaps without further legislative intervention.

US Supreme Court-packing unlikely

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Change ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Presidential Nomination ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Conservative Bias

Significance Rubio's move comes as several candidates for the Democratic Party's 2020 presidential nomination are discussing 'packing' the Supreme Court -- adding justices intended to nullify the perceived long-term conservative bias of the Court following Trump-era appointments. Impacts A constitutional change to limit the Supreme Court to nine justices is unlikely: amendments are purposely hard. Court-packing would not guarantee 'Democratic' or 'Republican' rulings: much depends on the case and how justices feel. Packing the courts would likely increase their politicisation, and potentially slow their deliberative capacity. If Trump wins a second term and Republicans keep the Senate, they will appoint further conservative justices. If the Democrats win the White House and Senate in 2020, they might 'pack' the lower courts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document