Rejoinder to Gordon Wood

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 563-566
Author(s):  
Shlomo Slonim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Change ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
American Studies ◽  
The United States ◽  
Israeli Supreme Court ◽  
The University ◽  
The U.S

Gordon Wood mentions that in 1987, as part of the Hebrew University's program of events marking the bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution, he delivered the annual Samuel Paley Lectures in American Civilization at the University in Jerusalem. If I, as chairman of the Department of American Studies was, as he says, a gracious host, he was no less a gracious guest and, moreover, a fascinating lecturer. A synopsis of his remarks is included in the volume that I edited, The Constitutional Bases of Political and Social Change in the United States, comprising lectures delivered at a bicentennial conference later that year and attended by prominent American and Israeli constitutional scholars, including Ruth Bader Ginsburg, now Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and Aharon Barak, now President of the Israeli Supreme Court.

Questions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Gibson ◽  
Michael J. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
The U.S

We have investigated the differences in support for the U.S. Supreme Court among black, Hispanic, and white Americans, catalogued the variation in African Americans’ group attachments and experiences with legal authorities, and examined how those latter two factors shape individuals’ support for the U.S. Supreme Court, that Court’s decisions, and for their local legal system. We take this opportunity to weave our findings together, taking stock of what we have learned from our analyses and what seem like fruitful paths for future research. In the process, we revisit Positivity Theory. We present a modified version of the theory that we hope will guide future inquiry on public support for courts, both in the United States and abroad.

scholarly journals Immunizing the Flock: How the Pandemic Court Rewrote Religious Freedom

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Paul Baumgardner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Practices ◽  
The Past ◽  
The U.S

When coronavirus began to descend upon the United States, religious freedom advocates across the country sounded the alarm that citizens’ religious practices and institutions were under threat. Although some of the most extreme arguments championed by these advocates were not validated by our legal system, many were. This article explores the underappreciated gains made by religious freedom advocates before the U.S. Supreme Court over the past year. As a result of the “Pandemic Court”, religious freedom in the United States has been rewritten. This promises to radically change the educational, employment, and health prospects of millions of Americans for the rest of the pandemic and long afterwards.

Education and the University of North Carolina Pre-Flight School

Home Front ◽  
2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
Military Training ◽  
The United States ◽  
Colleges And Universities ◽  
The State ◽  
Chapel Hill ◽  
Trained Teachers ◽  
The University ◽  
The U.S

Primary and secondary schools were hard hit by the war, with a dearth of supplies and trained teachers. Many colleges and universities, vacated by men off to war, would have had to close were it not for the U.S. military training units at the schools. Each institution in the state had some sort of government activity on their campuses, but the preeminent center was the Navy Pre-Fight School at UNC-Chapel Hill, where two future presidents of the United States, George H. W. Bush and Gerald Ford trained.

The Communist TA: Edward Yellin

2019 ◽  
pp. 19-21
Author(s):  
Michael V. Metz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Communist Party ◽  
Graduate Student ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
The University

Yellin was a youthful member of the Communist Party prior to his enrollment at Illinois as an engineering graduate student and recipient of a paid university fellowship. When he was found guilty of four charges of contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), the university suspended him, then later rescinded the suspension, all with no apparent involvement by President Henry. The United States Supreme Court eventually overturned Yellin’s conviction.

scholarly journals U.S. Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Habeas Case Brought by Guantánamo Bay Detainee Challenging His Continuing Detention

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 849-855
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
Past Time ◽  
Guantanamo Bay ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
September 11 Attacks ◽  
The U.S

On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in a case in which the D.C. Circuit held that the United States could continue to detain an individual at Guantánamo Bay until the cessation of the hostilities that justified his initial detention, notwithstanding the extraordinary length of the hostilities to date. The case, Al-Alwi v. Trump, arises from petitioner Moath Hamza Ahmed Al-Alwi's petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of his continued detention at the United States Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay. The Supreme Court's denial of certiorari was accompanied by a statement by Justice Breyer observing that “it is past time to confront the difficult question” of how long a detention grounded in the U.S. response to the September 11 attacks can be justified.

Jam v. International Finance Corp. (U.S. Sup. Ct.)

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 646-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Perkins ◽  
Sally Pei
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Finance ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Critical Importance ◽  
The U.S

On February 27, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Jam v. International Finance Corp., a case of critical importance for international organizations. The question presented in Jam was whether U.S. law affords international organizations absolute immunity from suit in the United States, or whether international organizations instead are entitled to only the more limited or “restrictive” immunity that applies to foreign sovereigns under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

APPLICATION THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES PRINCIPLE OF SOCIAL STATE

10.12737/903 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-81
Author(s):  
Владимир Сафонов ◽  
Vladimir Safonov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social State ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The U.S

The article reveals the problem of applying the principle of the social state in the practice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 1109-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Caldeira ◽  
John R. Wright
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Organized Interests ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Selection Of

Participation as amicus curiae has long been an important tactic of organized interests in litigation before the U.S. Supreme Court. We analyze amicus curiae briefs filed before the decision on certiorari and assess their impact on the Court's selection of a plenary docket. We hypothesize that one or more briefs advocating or opposing certiorari increase the likelihood of its being granted. We test this hypothesis using data from the United States Reports and Briefs and Records of the United States Supreme Court for the 1982 term. The statistical analysis demonstrates that the presence of amicus curiae briefs filed prior to the decision on certiorari significantly and positively increases the chances of the justices' binding of a case over for full treatment—even after we take into account the full array of variables other scholars have hypothesized or shown to be substantial influences on the decision to grant or deny.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document