scholarly journals Taking Note: Justice Harry A. Blackmun's Observations from Oral Argument about Life, the Law, and the U.S. Supreme Court

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-65
Author(s):  
AMANDA C. BRYAN ◽  
RACHAEL HOUSTON ◽  
TIMOTHY R. JOHNSON
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Oral Argument ◽  
The Law ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Observing Supreme Court Oral Argument: A Biosocial Approach

1992 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
James N. Schubert ◽  
Steven A. Peterson ◽  
Glendon Schubert ◽  
Stephen Wasby
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Voice Quality ◽  
Systematic Observation ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Political Interaction ◽  
Oral Argument ◽  
Level Of Analysis ◽  
The U.S

Supreme Court oral argument (OA) is one of many face-to-face settings of political interaction. This article describes a methodology for the systematic observation and measurement of behavior in OA developed in a study of over 300 randomly selected cases from the 1969-1981 terms of the U.S. Supreme Court. Five sources of observation are integrated into the OA database at the speaking turn level of analysis: the actual text of verbal behavior; categorical behavior codes; aspects of language use and speech behavior events; electro-acoustical measurement of voice quality; and content analysis of subject matter. Preliminary data are presented to illustrate the methodology and its application to theoretical concerns of the research project.

Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 429-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eve M. Ringsmuth ◽  
Amanda C. Bryan ◽  
Timothy R. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Oral Argument ◽  
The U.S

Under The Law: The historic Bostock opinion and LGBTQ rights in schools

2020 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-65
Author(s):  
Robert Kim
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Charter Schools ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Schools ◽  
Civil Rights Act ◽  
Lgbtq Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
The U.S

In Bostock v. Clayton, the U.S. Supreme Court held that discrimination against employees because they are gao or transgender violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Robert Kim summarizes the case and explains what the ruling means for schools. LGBTQ educators have historically faced discrimination, but such actions are now prohibited in nearly all public, private, and charter schools. Religious schools, however, may be exempt, and the ruling does not address other issues of discrimination in schools, such restroom access.

Of Corporations, Courts, Personhood, and Morality

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (04) ◽  
pp. 415-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret M. Blair
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Corporate Personhood ◽  
Social Responsibilities ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Law ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT:Since the dawn of capitalism, corporations have been regarded by the law as separate legal “persons.” Corporate “personhood” has nonetheless remained controversial, and our understanding of corporate personhood often influences our thinking about the social responsibilities of corporations. This essay, written in honor of Prof. Thomas Donaldson, explores the tension in recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Delaware Chancery Court about what corporations are, whose interests they serve, and who gets to make decisions about what they do. These decisions suggest that the law does not unequivocally support Donaldson’s vision of corporations as “moral” persons.

Under the Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 98 (7) ◽  
pp. 76-77
Author(s):  
Julie Underwood
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
K 12 ◽  
The U.S

How would the appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court (presuming he is confirmed by the U.S. Congress) affect the court’s dynamics, its ideological balance, and specifically its decisions on cases that bear upon K-12 education? Is he likely to be another Justice Antonin Scalia, will he be less conservative, or will he be more so? The author looks for clues in the opinions Gorsuch has written for the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Under the Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 99 (5) ◽  
pp. 76-77
Author(s):  
Julie Underwood
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Educational Rights ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

The right to an education is guaranteed by international law in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Similarly, UNESCO’s Constitution sets out the right to an education as necessary to “prepare the children of the world for the responsibilities of freedom.” No such right is mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, though. Perhaps Congress or the Supreme Court would be sympathetic, however, to an argument for educational rights based on the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of the rights of citizenship.

The functions of oral argument in the U.S. supreme court

1976 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 410-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Wasby ◽  
Anthony A. D'Amato ◽  
Rosemary Metrailer
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Oral Argument ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Revitalizing The U.S. Compliance Power

2008 ◽  
Vol 102 (3) ◽  
pp. 551-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Charnovitz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The U.S

Although “[tjreaties are the law of the land, and a rule of decision in all courts,” the president and the courts may sometimes be powerless to achieve compliance with a U.S. treaty. That was the puzzling outcome of Medellin v. Texas. Even though the Supreme Court declared that the United States has an international obligation to comply with the Avena judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Court invalidated the president’s memorandum directing Texas and other errant states to comply.

scholarly journals The Influence of Oral Arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court

2006 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
TIMOTHY R. JOHNSON ◽  
PAUL J. WAHLBECK ◽  
JAMES F. SPRIGGS
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Unique Data ◽  
Oral Argument ◽  
Data Source ◽  
The U.S

We posit that Supreme Court oral arguments provide justices with useful information that influences their final votes on the merits. To examine the role of these proceedings, we ask the following questions: (1) what factors influence the quality of arguments presented to the Court; and, more importantly, (2) does the quality of a lawyer's oral argument affect the justices' final votes on the merits? We answer these questions by utilizing a unique data source—evaluations Justice Blackmun made of the quality of oral arguments presented to the justices. Our analysis shows that Justice Blackmun's grading of attorneys is somewhat influenced by conventional indicators of the credibility of attorneys and are not simply the product of Justice Blackmun's ideological leanings. We thus suggest they can plausibly be seen as measuring the quality of oral argument. We further show that the probability of a justice voting for a litigant increases dramatically if that litigant's lawyer presents better oral arguments than the competing counsel. These results therefore indicate that this element of the Court's decisional process affects final votes on the merits, and it has implications for how other elite decision makers evaluate and use information.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document