Kinship and Politics: The Justices of the United States and Louisiana Supreme Courts.

1998 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 535
Author(s):  
Thomas C. Mackey ◽  
Donn M. Kurtz II
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Supreme Courts

Rights Discourse and Assisted Suicide

2001 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-99
Author(s):  
Penney Lewis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical Professionals ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Law Professors

The debate surrounding the legalization of assisted suicide has been galvanized in recent years by reports of specific cases of assisted suicide, primarily involving physicians such as Kevorkian and Quill, and by impassioned pleas for legalization and assistance in suicide from individuals suffering in the throes of terminal or agonizing diseases, such as Sue Rodriguez. Media attention on criminal trials of individuals accused of assisting in a suicide has heightened public awareness of the issue. The constitutionality of criminal prohibitions on assisted suicide has been tested in various jurisdictions, and has recently been considered by the Supreme Courts of both the United States and Canada. Following two narrowly unsuccessful attempts to enact dignified death provisions by referenda in Washington and California, Oregon voters passed the first of such proposed laws in November 1994, providing for physician-assisted suicide under certain specified conditions. Attempts to introduce legislation to legalize assisted suicide in other jurisdictions have been galvanized by the success in Oregon. A model statute has been drafted by a group of law professors, philosophers and medical professionals.

Benign Discrimination and the Right to Equality

1974 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Evans
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Preferential Treatment ◽  
Apparent Paradox ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Formal Expression ◽  
Gareth Evans ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right

Governments have been increasingly preoccupied with the task of reconciling claims to preferential treatment with the principle of equality. The social and philosophical issues raised by this apparent paradox are considered, and the compatibility of benign discrimination with the concept of equality demonstrated by developing a complex normative notion of equality. An analysis is then undertaken of the various attempts made by lawyers, in nearly one hundred existing bills of rights, to give formal expression to these principles. Ultimately the problem of benign discrimination falls for resolution by the courts, and the jurisprudence developed in this respect by the Supreme Courts of Canada and the United States is critically discussed and compared. Having exhaustively developed an appreciation of world experience regarding the interaction of bills of rights equality clauses and benign discrimination, consideration is given to the formulation of the Australian Human Rights Bill—a bill of which Gareth Evans was one of the principal draftsmen.

Supreme Court Elections: How Much They Have Changed, Why They Changed, and What Difference It Makes

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (03) ◽  
pp. 900-923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Baum
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
The United States ◽  
Business Community ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Electoral Campaigns ◽  
State Supreme Court ◽  
Selection Systems

This essay draws on four recent studies of elections to state supreme courts in the United States to probe widely perceived changes in the scale and content of electoral campaigns for seats on state supreme courts. 1 Evidence from these studies and other sources indicates that changes have indeed occurred, though they are more limited than most commentaries suggest. These changes stem most directly from trends in state supreme court policy that have attracted interest-group activity, especially from the business community. Like their extent, the effects of change in supreme court campaigns have been meaningful although exaggerated by many observers. What we have learned about changes in supreme court elections has implications for choices among selection systems, but those implications are mixed and complex.

scholarly journals Same-Party Legislative Appointments and the Problem of Party-Switching

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-198
Author(s):  
Tyler Yeargain
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Legislators ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
State Supreme Court ◽  
State Legislator ◽  
Party Switching ◽  
Switching State

For half of the states and almost every territory in the United States, legislative vacancies are filled by some system of temporary appointments rather than by special elections. Most of these systems utilize “same-party” appointments to ensure continuity of representation. But few states have anticipated the problem of state legislators switching parties. Though party-switching is rare, it happens frequently enough that several state supreme courts have already interpreted same-party appointment statutes as applied to party-switchers. This Article argues for a uniform approach to the problem of party-switchers in same-party appointment systems. First, this Article reviews the current legislative appointment schemes as they operate today and analyzes each statute or constitutional provision to determine how each of them might treat a vacancy caused by a party-switching state legislator, as well as the four state supreme court decisions addressing this question of statutory interpretation. It then argues that the principles underlying same-party appointment systems support statutory amendments to clarify how party-switching state legislators are replaced.

scholarly journals Growing Pains and Other Things: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 753-796
Author(s):  
Edward G. Hudon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Growing Pains ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
History Of

This article is in part a book review and in part a study of two institutions. In it, the author compares the origin and growth of the Supreme Court of Canada and of the Supreme Court of the United States. He uses Professors James G. Snell and Frederick Vaughan's The Supreme Court of Canada: History of the Institution as a starting point, and he compares various aspects of the two Supreme Courts. He points out similarities in the problems that the two have confronted since the beginning, and he indicates the manner in which these problems have been resolved by each.

Many Laws, Many Legalities

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Kercher
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
English Law ◽  
Made In

Peter Karsten asks why there might be a greater comparative propensity among CANZ historians than among those of the United States. Part of the reason may lie in the legal education many of us in Australia received, and in the formal legal status of many commonwealth countries until recently. As recently as the early 1970s, Australian law students were taught that English law was as significant as that made in the Australian courts. Appeals from the Australian Supreme Courts to the Privy Council were finally abolished only in 1986. From that time onward, there was a drive within the law schools to find differences from England, to look toward comparisons with other places than England.

scholarly journals Healing the Broken

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-59
Author(s):  
Javier Stauring
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Young Age ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
The Past ◽  
The World ◽  
Second Chance ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Life Sentences

The United States is the only country in the world that sentences children to life in prison without the possibility of parole, but that horrifying practice is beginning to wane. Over the past five years, state and federal Supreme Courts have ruled that mandatory life sentences without parole for juveniles is unconstitutional, and California has enacted legislation that allows most of those sentenced to life as juveniles to petition for a new sentencing hearing. The hope generated by these efforts, giving a second chance to those who committed serious crimes at a young age, is transformational. This pendulum shift is the hard-won result of the organizing and advocacy efforts of passionate, resilient people who have lived with the ramifications of the gross failures of our justice system. In this essay, Stauring describes the work he’s done over the past quarter of a century to help bring these changes about.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document