Who Am I to Disagree with a Supreme Court Justice? Legal Education between Argument from Authority and Free Debate of Ideas

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virgilio Afonso da Silva ◽  
Daniel Wang
1988 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 391
Author(s):  
Mark C. Rahdert ◽  
R. Kent Newmyer

Author(s):  
Anna Siomopoulos

This chapter analyses how Hollywood focused on recognizable and venerable architectural representations of federal institutions to symbolise the new relationship that had developed between the citizenry and the national government under the aegis of the New Deal. Through case studies of three films respectively featuring the executive, legislative and judicial edifices of the national state – Gabriel over the White House (1933), Mr Smith Goes to Washington (1939), and The Talk of the Town (1942) – become sites of masculine transformations, as the three male protagonists each experience private revelations that help them take on new roles as president, senator and Supreme Court Justice respectively. Though each contains a romantic sub-plot, none of the movies ends with the expected scene of romantic coupling whose trajectory was established in the early scenes. Accordingly the male leads become defined less by private heterosexuality than by public involvement in the Roosveltian state.


Author(s):  
Linda Greenhouse

There are no formal requirements for becoming a Supreme Court justice. “The justices” explains that the role of justice is open to anyone who can be nominated by the president and confirmed by a majority vote. The current Supreme Court consists of nine justices. The first membership was entirely Protestant, and there were no women until 1981. The modern court lacks diversity of professional backgrounds; many of the justices were formerly judges. Some appointments, both historical and recent, have been controversial. It is not unheard of for a justice’s ideology to drift after his or her appointment, in some cases amounting to considerable changes in outlook during that justice’s time in the Court.


1995 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith E. Whittington

Only the United States supreme court justice has ever been impeached. In January 1804, the House of Representatives began a formal inquiry into the official conduct of Associate Justice Samuel Chase and approved eight articles of impeachment in November of that same year. The Senate held a trial of the justice in February 1805, which concluded with his acquittal on March 1. On the final article of impeachment, Chase escaped removal by four votes.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-23
Author(s):  
Brian Christopher Jones ◽  
Austin Sarat

Abstract Perhaps no single judge in recent years has embodied the intricacies and difficulties of the cultural life of the law as much as American Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. While common law judges have traditionally acquired status—and cultural relevance—from the significance, eloquence and forcefulness of their judicial opinions, Justice Scalia took an altogether different route. Both on and off the bench, he pushed the limits of legal and political legitimacy. He did this through a strict adherence to what we call a “judicial mandate,” flamboyant but engaging writing, biting humor and widespread marketing of his originalist and textualist interpretative theories. This article chronicles these features of Scalia’s jurisprudence and public life more generally, ultimately characterising the late justice as a “sacred symbol” in American legal and political circles, and beyond.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document