US Supreme Court will generate greater controversy

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.

US Supreme Court paves way for more change next term

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.

The Challenges for Court Reform after Authoritarian Rule: The Role of Specialized Courts in Indonesia

Political transitions from authoritarian rule may lead to a process of court reform. Indeed, court reform has been a central pillar of the law and development movement since the 1960s. What challenges do court reform efforts face after authoritarian rule in Indonesia and to what extent can specialized courts address these challenges? In this article, I examine court reform and the establishment of specialized courts in Indonesia post-1998. I argue that we need to pay attention to the politics of court reform after authoritarian rule. Specialized courts as a type of institutional reform need to be considered together with judicial culture in order to address fundamental challenges in the courts.

Concern at opaque US Supreme Court rulings grows

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.

Biden's Supreme Court reform commission starts work

Headline UNITED STATES: Court reform commission starts work

US Supreme Court Commission will consider reforms

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.

Legal Reformation of Tax Court in Indonesia: Reforming Legal Culture, Institutional and Legislative Aspects

This research is motivated by the many weaknesses that exist in the Ppajak court in Indonesia. Therefore, this research needs to be carried out with the aim that the tax court in the future will be better, more certain in law, and just. The problem is the reason for reforming the tax court in Indonesia and the way to reform the law on the tax court in Indonesia. The research method used is a statutory, historical, and comparative approach. The result of his research is that the tax court in Indonesia must be reformed because it contains many weaknesses. Furthermore, the findings show that tax court reform must be carried out from the aspects of legislation, institutional and legal culture. Based on the statutory aspect, synchronization of laws must be carried out. Based on the institutional aspect, institutional improvement must be carried out. Based on the aspect of legal culture, this must be done by increasing the morale of the parties. The novelty of this research is that the tax dispute settlement model is found after the tax court becomes a special court within the state administrative court. In conclusion, the tax court in Indonesia still contains many weaknesses, so it must be reformed immediately.

Tsintsadze Nina S. Associate Professor of the Department of Theory and History of State and Law of the Derzhavin Tambov State University PhD (History), Associate Professor

In the article the content of the draft reform of the arbitration court, prepared on behalf of Emperor Alexander I G.R. Derzhavin is analyzed in detail. As sources, both published and archival materials were used. The attitude of contemporaries and descendants to this project was ambiguous. Lawyers controversially evaluated the project of the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of the Senate. Many of them drew attention to the complexity of the proposed methods of arbitration of legal disputes. It is noted that for the beginning of the XIX century this project of reorganization of the arbitration court was rather bold, as it allowed publicity, wordlessness, openness of legal proceedings. In many ways Derzhavin’s proposals were ahead of time. The conclusion is drawn about the relevance of the project in the context of modern court reform and the expansion of the practice of alternative dispute resolution methods.