The Meaning of “Not Innocent”

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-312
Author(s):  
Jodi Kaufmann
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Police Officer ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The Body ◽  
District Court ◽  
Anthony Davis ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
The U.S

Mark MacPhail was murdered. The body of the white police officer was found fatally shot in Savannah, Georgia on August 19, 1989. Black and poor, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of the murder and sentenced to death. Many people believe Davis innocent. In 2009 the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the District Court in Savannah to grant Davis an evidentiary hearing. Davis was found “not innocent.” Post-conviction, “not innocent” is a complex signifier. In this case it was constructed by the District Court through four interpretive lenses: Georgia's relation to the death penalty, the Anti-terrorism Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), Supreme Court rulings, and the District Court's subjective imaginary. As each of these interpretive lenses is imbued with racism, the question of whether Georgia will execute an innocent man becomes starkly real. In this paper, I examine the post-conviction construction of “not innocent” as it relates to the Troy Davis case.

Legislative Department

2020 ◽  
pp. 73-104
Author(s):  
Danny M. Adkison ◽  
Lisa McNair Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The State ◽  
Legislative Authority ◽  
The People ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
The U.S

This chapter assesses Article V of the Oklahoma constitution, which concerns the legislative department. Section 1 states that “the Legislative authority of the State shall be vested in a Legislature, consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” However, “the people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and amendments to the Constitution and to enact or reject the same at the polls independent of the Legislature, and also reserve power at their own option to approve or reject at the polls any act of the Legislature.” Section 2 provides for the designation and definition of reserved powers. Initiative means the power of the people to propose bills, and to enact or reject them at the polls. Referendum is the right of the people to have bills passed by the legislature submitted to the voters for their approval. Meanwhile, in May 1964, the Oklahoma constitution was amended to conform to the U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The amendment passed and Sections 9 through 16 were replaced with Sections 9A through 11E. The chapter then details the provisions for the Senate and the House of Representatives.

An Angle of Vision

2020 ◽  
pp. 43-54
Author(s):  
Edward A. Jr. Purcell
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Personal Values ◽  
Gay Marriage ◽  
True Nature ◽  
The U.S

This chapter discusses the variety of types of cases Justice Antonin Scalia heard on the U.S. Supreme Court and notes their variety as well as the fact that in a few areas Scalia took originalist positions that brought results commonly regarded as “liberal,” such as his interpretation of the Confrontation Clause. The chapter then turns to the bulk of the cases where he supported “conservative” results. It points out that he used his originalist jurisprudence vigorously to defend certain positions that involved his own most intensely held personal values (those dealing with abortion, gay marriage, the death penalty, and assisted suicide), and it suggests that his originalism may have been designed to justify his views on those issues. The chapter then suggests that the true test of his jurisprudence and methodology lay not in his actions in those cases but rather in the more general run of cases where he applied his jurisprudential principles inconsistently, failed to apply them at all, or actually rejected them. That large and final category of cases constituted the majority of his decisions and opinions, the chapter argues, and it provides the best ground for testing his jurisprudential claims and ultimately identifying the true nature of his jurisprudence and the significance of his judicial career.

The Execution of Wallace Wilkerson

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Acker ◽  
Ryan Champagne
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Death Sentence ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Firing Squad ◽  
Lethal Injection ◽  
The U.S

Wallace Wilkerson was executed by a Utah firing squad in 1879 after the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of his sentence. Shots from the marksmen’s rifles missed his heart. Not strapped into the chair where he had been seated, Wilkerson lurched onto the ground and exclaimed, “My God!…They missed it!” He groaned, continued breathing, and was pronounced dead some 27 min later. Relying on contemporaneous news accounts and legal documents, this article describes Wilkerson’s crime, the judicial decisions upholding his death sentence, and his execution. It next examines ensuing methods of capital punishment from the electric chair through lethal injection and notes persistent gaps between principle and practice in the continuing quest for increasingly humane modes of execution. The article concludes by suggesting that Wilkerson’s botched firing squad execution harbingered difficulties which continue to plague capital punishment. The implications for the future of the death penalty—a long-standing and resilient practice in American criminal justice—and the ultimate legacy of Wallace Wilkerson remain uncertain, although starkly evident is the daunting and perhaps impossible challenge of reconciling the paradox inherent in the concept of a “humane execution.”

scholarly journals The Confirmation Obstacle Course: Signaling Opposition through Delay

2012 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 23-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Holmes ◽  
Salmon A. Shomade ◽  
Roger E. Hartley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
District Court ◽  
Proportional Hazards Models ◽  
Judiciary Committee ◽  
Time Required ◽  
The U.S

We examine the time required for lower federal court nominees to complete the confirmation process. Using proportional hazards models, we analyze delay at the Judiciary Committee stage and the full Senate vote stage from 1977 to 2010, finding that delay has been used by members of the committee and the full Senate to signal opposition to nominees. Delay at the committee stage has influenced delay on the Senate floor for circuit and district court nominees, at least in the years since Robert Bork’s failed nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Our findings indicate that senators pick up on committee delay as a cue in the confirmation process. Examining the distinct stages of the confirmation process provides important new insights into legislative signaling behavior and confirmation politics.

scholarly journals Revisiting Death's Difference: The Philosophical Anthropology of the U.S. Death Penalty and the Impossibility of Capital Due Process

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-208
Author(s):  
G.P. Marcar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Philosophical Anthropology ◽  
The United States ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Eighth Amendment ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
The U.S

AbstractWithin the United States, legal challenges to the death penalty have held it to be a “cruel and unusual” punishment (contrary to the Eighth Amendment) or arbitrarily and unfairly enacted (contrary to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments). The Eighth Amendment requires that punishments not be disproportionate or purposeless. In recent rulings, the U.S. Supreme Court has adopted a piecemeal approach to this matter. In regard to particular classes of defendant, the Court has sought to rule on whether death is likely to be a proportional and purposeful punishment, as well as whether—given the condition of these defendants—such a determination can be reliably and accurately gauged. This article will suggest a different approach. Instead of asking whether, given the nature of certain categories of human defendant, the death penalty is constitutional in their case, I will begin by asking what—given the nature of the U.S. death penalty—one must believe about human beings for death to be a proportionate punishment. From this, I will argue that to believe that these penal goals are capable of fulfilment by the death penalty entails commitment to an empirically unconfirmable philosophical anthropology. On this basis, it will be further argued that the beliefs required for the U.S. death penalty's proportional and purposeful instigation (pursuant to the Eighth Amendment) are not congruent with the demands of legal due process.

scholarly journals INDEPENDENSI SISTEM PERADILAN MILITER DI INDONESIA (Studi Tentang Struktur Peradilan Militer) / THE INDEPENDENCY OF MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE INDONESIAN (The Study of The Structure of The Judiciary)

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Slamet Sarwo Edy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Body ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
District Court ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Military

Peradilan militer adalah badan yang melaksanakan kekuasaan kehakiman di lingkungan TNI untuk menegakan hukum dan keadilan. Pengadilan militer tidak berpuncak dan tidak diawasi oleh markas besar TNI, tetapi berpuncak dan diawasi oleh MA RI. Filosofi terjadinya ketidakmandirian dalam sistem peradilan militer pertama, karena faktor kepentingan militer (TNI) yaitu berkaitan dengan tugas pokok TNI mempertahankan kedaulatan negara, oleh karena itu dengan menempatkan peran komandan satuan (Ankum) maupun lembaga kepaperaan didalam sistem penegakan hukum tersebut. Kedua, pada awal pembentukan organisasi peradilan militer menempatkan aparat peradilan sipil sebagai penjabat pada pengadilan militer. Ketua pengadilan negeri yang ditunjuk sebagai tempat kedudukan pengadilan tentara karena jabatannya menjadi ketua pengadilan tentara. Panitera pengadilan negeri juga menjabat sebagai panitera pengadilan tentara, kepala kejaksaan negeri ditetapkan sebagai jaksa tentara. Keadaan demikian menimbulkan keberatan-keberatan dengan alasan dipandang akan tidak menguntungkan bagi militer ataupun kesatuan militer. Peradilan militer ke depan harus mandiri baik secara kelembagaan maupun secara fungsional. Dalam konteks itu maka penyidik adalah polisi militer yang terdiri AD, AL dan AU, bertanggung jawab kepada Danpuspom TNI. Penuntutan dan pelimpahan perkara ke pengadilan dilaksanakan oleh oditur militer yang bertanggung jawab kepada Orjen TNI. Kewenangan pengadilan tidak lagi didasarkan kepada kepangkatan terdakwa. Pembinaan organisasi, administrasi, dan finansial pengadilan militer sepenuhnya berada dibawah MARI sebagaimana diatur dalam undang-undang.Military Court is the body that conduct the judicial power in the Indonesian Military Force (TNI) scope to enforce law and justice. The Military Court does not culminate and not supervised by the Indonesian Military Force headquarters, but culminates and is supervised by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The Philosophy of  the occurrence of dependence in the first military justice system, because of the interest of the military (TNI) which is associated with its principal task of TNI is to defend the national sovereignty, for that reason, by putting the role of commander of the unit (Ankum) as well as kepaperaan within the law enforcement system. The Head of the district court also covers Military Court in his jurisdiction because of it the Head of district court becomes the Head of Military Court. The Registrar is automatically also the Registrar of Military Court, Head of State Prosecutors assigned as military prosecutor. These circumstances affect objections which are seen as unfavorable for military or military units. The authority of the Court is no longer based on the rank of the defendant, the hierarchy of court proceedings such as judges, military Prosecutors, defense attorneys, no longer use the rank but wearing a toga. Development of organizational, administrative, financial of Military Courts is fully under the Supreme Court held consequently as stipulated in the law of judicial power.  The execution of criminal act by military prison, executed equally as prisoner without discriminating the person by his rank. 

scholarly journals Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance: The U.S. Supreme Court Fails to Act on Agency Inaction

2006 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher M. Buell
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
District Court ◽  
Land Use Management ◽  
Bureau Of Land Management ◽  
Unanimous Opinion ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Wilderness Areas ◽  
Agency Action ◽  
The U.S

Citing inaction by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in preventing damage to lands designated for possible preservation from explosive increases in off-road vehicle use, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) sued BLM in 1998 to force it to prevent impairment of the lands. Although the case involved preservation and land-use management statutes, the conflict ultimately came down to the courts’ power under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to force an agency to comply with a statutory mandate to preserve wilderness areas. After a Utah district court dismissed SUWA’s claims and the Tenth Circuit reversed and remanded, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case and issued a unanimous opinion in June 2004. In Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, the Court dismissed SUWA’s claims for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, reasoning that the APA does not sanction judicial review of agency inaction unless the action sought to be compelled is “discrete agency action.”

The U.S. Supreme Court Decisions

2020 ◽  
pp. 144-178
Author(s):  
Donald W. Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Fourteenth Amendment ◽  
District Court ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Jurisdiction ◽  
The U.S

This chapter traces Hague’s appeal through the Third Circuit Court of Appeals into the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, showing how the Hughes court’s inner dynamics explain affirmation of the district court injunction. Observing flux in court personnel and law, the chapter shows that both courts embraced the contemporaneous civil liberties revolution by defending worker speech and assembly rights, but it reveals the Supreme Court as divided over constitutional logic. Justice Owen Roberts’s plurality opinion upheld speech and assembly rights under the Fourteenth Amendment privileges and immunities clause, Justice Harlan Fiske Stone’s concurrence incorporated the First Amendment into the Fourteenth Amendment due-process clause, and dissenters rejected federal jurisdiction. The ruling reflected the contentious evolution of civil liberties jurisprudence, not antiboss or labor law politics.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015

2021 ◽  
pp. 191-206
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 14 tells the story of how Jim Obergefell, whose husband John Arthur was dying, sued the state of Ohio to try to force the state to list Obergefell as the husband on Arthur’s death certificate. Ohio was one of many states whose constitution explicitly rejected recognition of same-sex marriages, wherever they were originally celebrated. Obergefell won in federal district court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals consolidated his case with DeBoer v. Snyder from Michigan and cases from two other states, and overturned them all. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision of 2015 made marriage equality the law of the U.S. After the Obergefell victory, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse were legally married in Michigan and then cross-adopted their children.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document