DOCSLIB.ORG

Congressional Record—Senate S2232

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Congressional Record—Senate S2232 S2232 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE February 12, 2003 Chairman Greenspan’s statements and to make a decision whether this nomi- vote on somebody for a lifetime posi- other issues we think are just as im- nation is going to be pulled, whether tion in the courts. He has written ex- portant to talk about. But during these the memos will be supplied to us so we tensively, but he has kept the writing nominations, when there is extended can review them, whether there is secret. debate, we are allowed to do that. going to be more opportunity to ask We have ample precedent for similar Whatever the leader wants us to do, we questions, or whether there is going to writings that have been made available are here. Whether it is tonight, tomor- be a vote on cloture. Those are the for everything from a nomination of a row night, Friday, Saturday, whatever three choices the leader has. it is, we will be at your disposal. Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I agree, in man who became Attorney General to Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I appre- essence, those are the three choices, a man who became the Chief Justice of ciate the comments of the assistant and as majority leader, I consider what the United States, William Rehnquist. Democratic leader. My objective is to I feel is stalling on this nomination The Democratic leader and I wrote to fully address the nomination of this and not allowing an up-or-down vote of the President and asked once again: outstanding, well-qualified candidate. sufficient importance that we will con- Release those secret writings. If we really get to the point where the tinue to address it. There are many Ironically, Mr. Estrada told us, when other side of the aisle says there is other important issues this Senate asked, he had no objection to those nothing more to be said, I would sim- must address. If we could just agree on writings being released. He has no ob- ply ask that we do take this to a vote an up-or-down vote right now, which jection to them being released. It is and give us in this body the oppor- the distinguished assistant Democratic only the White House has said: We will tunity to vote, yes, we are for the nom- leader has said they are not going to do not release them. If they were released, ination or, no, we are against the nom- on the other side of the aisle, we could ination, if we really have had full de- I suspect we would then have a discus- go on to address these other important sion of what is in those writings, and bate, and from what I have just heard issues. we are getting close to that point, and we would go to a vote up or down, win I do want to make it clear, both to or lose. if everything has been said. this body, to the House of Representa- But the one thing I don’t want to tives, and to America, this side of the At least we would know what we are happen is for people to be critical: We aisle is ready for an up-or-down vote voting on. We would not have a stealth didn’t have enough time; we didn’t since, as we just agreed, there has candidate before the Senate. I think have enough opportunity to debate. the White House ought to look at the Our willingness to at least present probably already been adequate debate fact Mr. Estrada has said he has no ob- why we believe Miguel Estrada is ex- put forward, and I think it is impor- jection to his writings being made pub- tremely well qualified is close to being tant for America to understand your fulfilled. And if we get to the point side of the aisle—whether you use the lic. They ought to make them public, where there is nothing more to say on word ‘‘filibuster’’ or not—is obstruct- and then we can go ahead and complete the other side of the aisle, then we ing or stalling the process which is im- action up or down on this nominee. would expect, if that is the case, an up- portant to our judicial system and to Again, I thank my good friend from or-down vote. I think that signal is our responsibilities, our constitutional Utah for his courtesy in letting me go being sent strongly through our col- responsibilities in this body. forward. I yield the floor. f leagues and what has happened on the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- floor this week. RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME I think America is paying attention, ator from Utah. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under recognizing that at this juncture, we Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, it is in- the previous order, the leadership time believe Miguel Estrada is well qualified teresting that my colleague, who is my is reserved. and that there is a critical, drastic friend, says Miguel Estrada is holding shortage of Federal judges today. When f this process up, and then at the end of you put those two together—that we EXECUTIVE SESSION his remarks says he has agreed, he has feel strongly Miguel Estrada is a well- no objections to giving these docu- qualified judge and that there is a dras- NOMINATION OF MIGUEL A. ments, but they never emphasize the tic shortage of judges and our responsi- ESTRADA, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE fact the Justice Department is highly bility to address that issue, which we UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE justified, is absolutely right, and has are doing well on the floor now—we FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUM- the opinion of the seven former Solici- would expect that up-or-down vote in BIA CIRCUIT tors General saying these types of con- the next couple of days. fidential memoranda should not be The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- given to the Judiciary Committee or to ator from Nevada. the previous order, the Senate will now Mr. REID. Mr. President, I com- go into executive session to resume Congress. The reason for this is that pliment the leader. In the short time consideration of Executive Calendar these memoranda are utilized in decid- he has been leader, he has allowed full No. 21, which the clerk will report. ing what the Solicitor General’s Office and adequate debate. He could have The legislative clerk read the nomi- should do with regard to various cases. tried to stop debate on the omnibus nation of Miguel A. Estrada, of Vir- If these memoranda become readily bill, and the leader chose not to do ginia, to be United States Circuit available or available at all outside the that, and I think it worked to every- Judge for the District of Columbia Cir- Justice Department, this would chill one’s advantage. On this side of the cuit. the honest, forthright deliberations, aisle, we appreciate that very much. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who suggestions, and recommendations by I do say, though, speaking as one seeks recognition? those who work in the Justice Depart- Senator, but having spent a little time The Senator from Vermont. ment. I do not think it takes any on this floor, just about everything has Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I will be brains to realize the Justice Depart- been said about Miguel Estrada. There very brief. I see the distinguished ment is totally right. will be other people who wish to make chairman of the committee on the statements. As I said, everything has floor. Under normal procedures, he Miguel Estrada is being blamed be- been said but not everyone has said it. would speak first. I appreciate his cause the Justice Department, in ac- We will do everything we can to make courtesy in withholding for a moment. cordance with their seven former So- sure everyone has said it. The majority A lot has been said, and as the distin- licitors General, refuses to give up leader is going to find there will be guished senior Senator from Nevada these confidential memoranda, which other issues spoken about here. We are said, not all have said it. There is actu- are privileged, so the Democrats can go not going to—there is no reason to ally one person who, were he to speak, on a fishing expedition and see if they mince around. We are not going to could speed this whole matter up very can find some matters in those memo- allow an up-or-down vote on Miguel quickly. Miguel Estrada has written randa with which they disagree. They Estrada. That is clear. extensively on his views on very com- can then say: We cannot confirm him Our leader gave a speech yesterday to plex issues on law which would be of because he wrote some memoranda that effect. So the majority leader has great interest to those who have to with which we disagree. VerDate Dec 13 2002 01:26 Feb 13, 2003 Jkt 019060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G12FE6.003 S12PT1 February 12, 2003 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S2233 That is what is behind this. This is of the legislative branch also informed might be put on the circuit court of ap- not trying to be fair. This is not trying their decision to restrict the role of the peals? Very few. That means all these to understand what is good or bad Senate in the confirmation process.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE V. ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION and the FUTURE of REDISTRICTING REFORM David Gartner*
    ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE V. ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION AND THE FUTURE OF REDISTRICTING REFORM David Gartner* INTRODUCTION In 2018, voters in five different states passed successful initiatives that made it harder for politicians to choose their own districts and easier for independent voices to shape the redistricting process.1 This unprecedented transformation in the redistricting process would not have happened without the Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.2 That decision confirmed the constitutionality of Arizona’s own Independent Redistricting Commission and created an outlet for citizens frustrated with dysfunctional governance and unresponsive legislators to initiate reforms through the initiative process. All of these 2018 initiatives created or expanded state redistricting commissions which are to some degree insulated from the direct sway of the majority party in their respective legislatures.3 The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission has proven to be a model for some states and an inspiration for many more with respect to * Professor of Law at Arizona State University, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. 1. Brett Neely & Sean McMinn, Voters Rejected Gerrymandering in 2018, But Some Lawmakers Try to Hold Power, NRP (Dec. 28, 2018, 5:00 AM), https://www.npr.org/2018/12/28/675763553/voters-rejected-gerrymandering-in-2018-but-some- lawmakers-try-to-hold-power [https://perma.cc/3RJH-39P9] (noting voters in Ohio, Colorado, Michigan, Missouri,
    [Show full text]
  • Rex E. Lee Conference on the Office of the Solicitor General of the United States
    BYU Law Review Volume 2003 | Issue 1 Article 1 3-1-2003 Rex E. Lee Conference on the Office of the Solicitor General of the United States Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview Part of the Law and Politics Commons, and the Legal Profession Commons Recommended Citation Rex E. Lee Conference on the Office ofh t e Solicitor General of the United States, 2003 BYU L. Rev. 1 (2003). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2003/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Brigham Young University Law Review at BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Law Review by an authorized editor of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PANEL-FULL-FIN 2/15/2003 4:02 PM IN MEMORY OF REX E. LEE (1937–1996) Not long after former Solicitor General Rex E. Lee died, the Committee of the National Association of Attorneys General held its annual meeting in Washington, D.C. All fifty state attorneys general attended the meeting, which was held at the Supreme Court. During a question and answer period, Justice David Souter was asked how advocacy before the high court had changed in recent times. Justice Souter paused for a moment and answered, “Well, I can tell you that the biggest change by far is that Rex Lee is gone. Rex Lee was the best Solicitor General this nation has ever had, and he is the best lawyer this Justice ever heard plead a case in this Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of Meeting
    Minutes of Meeting ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE February 24, 2011 The organizational meeting of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Committee was called to order in the State Library Conference Room at 2:30 p.m. by Ken Bennett who then led the Pledge of Allegiance. Members present: Richard Stertz, Commissioner José M. Herrera, Commissioner Scott D. Freeman, Commissioner Linda McNulty, Commissioner Mr. Bennett explained that, under the Arizona Constitution, the Secretary of State is required to lead the first meeting of the IRC, which is comprised of four appointed members, two Republicans and two Democrats. The purpose of this meeting is to interview five Independent candidates who have been recommended to serve as the fifth member of the Commission and as Chairman. Secretary Bennett administered the Oath of Office to all four Commissioners. Commission members were then provided printed copies of the loyalty oath, which will be on file in the Secretary of State’s Office. Secretary Bennett explained that five candidates will be interviewed for the independent position and he asked if the Commissioners would like to do the interviews in public or in private. It was agreed that the interviews would be conducted in the public meeting. The meeting recessed at 2:40 p.m. since the agenda noted the first interview was scheduled for 3:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 3:00 p.m. Mr. Freeman asked if it would be proper to ask the other nominees to step out of the room while they conducted individual interviews. Jim Barton, Assistant Attorney General, agreed that would be appropriate Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • RESUME PAUL BENDER Professor of Law Arizona State University
    RESUME PAUL BENDER Professor of Law Arizona State University Addresses: Office: College of Law Arizona State University Box 877906 Tempe, Arizona 85287-7906 Tel: (480) 965-2556 Fax: (480) 727-6973 Home: 2222 North Alvarado Road Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Tel: (602) 253-8192 Fax: (602) 253-8192 Personal Information: Born, 1933, Brooklyn, New York. Married, 1955, to Margaret Thomas (A.B., Radcliffe College, 1955). Children: John F. (born 1965); Matthew L. (born 1967). Education: A.B., Harvard College, 1954, cum laude (physics). LL.B., Harvard Law School, 1957, magna cum laude (rank: 3rd of 505). Editorial Board, Harvard Law Review, Volumes 69 and 70; Developments and Supreme Court Note Editor, Volume 70. Research Assistant to Professor Benjamin Kaplan, Harvard Law School, Summer, 1958 (copyright law revision study on registration of copyright). 2008 Paul Bender Page 2 Clerkships and Fellowships: Frederick Sheldon Traveling Fellow, Harvard University, 1957-1958; Law Clerk, Judge Learned Hand, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1958-1959; Law Clerk, Justice Felix Frankfurter, Supreme Court of the United States, 1959-1960. Employment: Academic: Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School. 1960-1963; Visiting Assistant Professor, Stanford Law School, Summer, 1962; Associate Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School, 1963-1966; Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School, 1966-1984; Dean and Professor of Law, Arizona State University College of Law, 1984-1989; Professor of Law, 1989 to present.. Academic Subjects: Constitutional Law; Individual Rights; U.S. Supreme Court; Arizona Constitutional Law; Indian Law. Law Practice: Associate, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, New York, N.Y., 1957; Assistant to the Solicitor General of the United States, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 149 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2003 No. 26—Part II Senate EXECUTIVE SESSION The problem here is that he didn’t cuit Court of Appeals for the District answer the questions the way they of Columbia. wanted him to. He answered them the Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will NOMINATION OF MIGUEL A. way he should have. We put those ques- the Senator yield for a question? ESTRADA, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE tions and those answers into the UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE Mr. HATCH. I am happy to yield for RECORD today. a question without losing my right to FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUM- It is unfair, after what this man has BIA CIRCUIT the floor. gone through—after all the hearings, Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, one (Continued) all the questions, all the time that has of the issues I have heard raised by the The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The elapsed—almost 2 years—that this other side is that the nominee has not Senator from Utah. highly qualified individual is now being had judicial experience. In fact, the Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, here we filibustered on the floor of the Senate. chairman of the House Democratic His- are in the middle of an unprecedented If the Democrat Members of the Sen- panic Caucus wrote a letter to the Ju- filibuster against the first Hispanic ate do not like his answers, then they diciary Committee, I understand.
    [Show full text]
  • 95Th Arizona Town Hall Program Speaker Biographies
    TH 95 ARIZONA TOWN HALL PROGRAM SPEAKER BIOGRAPHIES Monday, November 2, Breakfast Panel presentation by authors of the 95th Arizona Town Hall Background Report Paul Bender Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law Paul Bender is a professor in the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, teaching courses on U.S. and Arizona constitutional law. He has written extensively about constitutional law, intellectual property and Indian law, and is co-author of the two-volume casebook/treatise, Political and Civil Rights in the United States. Professor Bender has argued more than 20 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and actively participates in constitutional litigation in federal and state courts. Professor Bender served as dean of the College of Law from 1984- 89, during which time he was instrumental in starting its Indian Legal Program. Prior to joining the College faculty, he was law clerk to 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Learned Hand and to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, and spent 24 years as a faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Professor Bender served as principal deputy solicitor general of the United States from 1993-97, with responsibility for Supreme Court and federal appellate litigation in the areas of civil rights, race and sex discrimination, freedom of speech and religion, and tort claims against the federal government. Professor Bender has served as a member of the Hopi Tribe’s Court of Appeals, and is currently chief justice of the Fort McDowell Nation Supreme Court, and the San Carlos Apache Court of Appeals.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Clerkship Handbook 2007-2008
    Judicial Clerkship Handbook 2007-2008 Career Services 1 CAREER SERVICES OFFICE STAFF Ilona DeRemer Lydia Montelongo Assistant Dean Associate Director [email protected] [email protected] Jacqueline Mendez Soto Assistant Director Judicial Clerkship Advisor [email protected] FACULTY JUDICIAL CLERKSHIP COMMITTEE 2007-2008 Professor Adam Chodorow, Chair Noel Fidel, Associate Dean Ilona DeRemer, Assistant Dean for Career Services Jacqueline Mendez Soto, Assistant Director of Career Services 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. IMPORTANT DATES AT A GLANCE ................................................................................ 4 2. WHY CLERK? ............................................................................................................... 5 BENEFITS OF A JUDICIAL CLERKHSIP ......................................................................... 5 3. TARGETING PROMISING CLERKSHIP OPPORTUNITIES ............................................... 5 TARGETING A SPECIFIC TYPE OF COURT ......................................................................... 6 SELECTING A GEOGRAPHIC AREA ................................................................................... 6 ASSESSING YOUR STRENGTHS/QUALIFICATIONS ............................................................ 7 4. RESEARCHING CLERKSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AND JUDGES ......................................... 7 JUDICIAL CLERKSHIP RESEARCH RESOURCES ................................................................. 7 5. THE MECHANICS OF A JUDICIAL CLERKSHIP APPLICATION.....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S2067
    February 10, 2003 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S2067 back and forth—all of them realized EXECUTIVE SESSION prevented a lower-court nominee’s confirma- that anyone can come down at any mo- tion, the White House says. And that’s good, It’s hard enough to get swift Judiciary Com- ment of inattention and, using the NOMINATION OF MIGUEL A. mittee action and floor votes for judicial rules, gain a one-time advantage. With ESTRADA, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE nominees. The possibility of a filibuster all the distinguished leaders, I never UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE probably checks rash or overly partisan saw a single one of them do that, even nominations; one can imagine candidates so FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUM- wrong or offensive that the tactic would be when over and over again they had an BIA justified. but a world in which filibusters opportunity to do it. Many times when The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- serve as an active instrument of nomination I was chairman of the Agriculture pore. The Senate will now resume exec- politics is not the either party should want. Committee, when I was chairman of Mr. Estrada’s nomination in no way justi- utive session and the consideration of fies a filibuster. The case against him is that Judiciary Committee, when I was Executive Calendar No. 21, which the he is a conservative who was publicly criti- chairman of the Foreign Operations clerk will report. cized by a former supervisor in the Office of Committee, and when I was chairman The legislative clerk read the nomi- the Solicitor General, where he once worked.
    [Show full text]
  • 1965 Journal
    OCTOBER TERM, 1965 REFERENCE INDEX CONTENTS: Page Statistics in General in Rules iv Appeals iv Arguments . v Attorneys vi Briefs vi Certiorari vi Costs and Damages vn Judgments, Opinions and Mandates vm Original Cases xi Parties xn Records xn Rehearings xn Stays and Bail xm Conclusion xm 228-828—66 : Ill STATISTICS Original Appellate Miscella- Total neous Number of cases on dockets 17 1, 436 1, 831 3, 284 Cases disposed of 9 1, 182 1, 502 2, 693 Remaining on dockets 8 254 329 591 Cases disposed of—Appellate Docket : By written opinions 121 By per curiam opinions or orders 161 By motion to dismiss or per stipulation (merits cases) 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 900 Cases disposed of—Miscellaneous Docket By written opinions 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 1, 271 By denial or withdrawal of other applications 147 By granting of other applications 1 By per curiam dismissal of appeals 37 By other per curiam opinions or orders 18 By transfer to Appellate Docket 28 Number of written opinions 97 Number of printed per curiam opinions 8 Number of petitions for certiorari granted (Appellate) 124 Number of appeals in which jurisdiction was noted or postponed 40 Number of admissions to bar 3, 331 GENERAL: Page Court convened October 4, 1965 and adjourned June 20, 1966 Wallace, Henry A. (former Vice President), Death an- nounced and Court adjourned out of respect to his memory 133 Reed, J., Designated and assigned to U.S. Court of Claims- 69 Designated and assigned to U.S.C.A.-D.C 155 Frankfurter, J., Resolutions of Bar presented 84 Minton, J., Resolutions of Bar presented 440 Whittaker, J.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTHERN KENTUCKY LAW REVIEW Volume 22 Summer 1995 Number 3
    NORTHERN KENTUCKY LAW REVIEW Volume 22 Summer 1995 Number 3 General Law Issue IN MEMORIAM Kenneth R. Simmonds ...................................... Roger D. Billings, Jr 559 SIEBENTHALER LECTURE The Nature of the Judicial Process Revisited ......... David A. Nelson 563 ARTICLES Impediments to Global Patent Law Harmonization .................................................. Anthony D. Sabatelli 579 Squeezing the Juice from Lemon: Toward a Consistent Test for the Establishment Clause ............................................ Carole F Kagan 621 SPECIAL ESSAY American Legal Populism: A Jurisprudential and Historical Narrative, Including Reflections on Critical Legal Studies .................................................... John Batt 651 BOOK REVIEW Learned Hand: Evaluating a Federal Judge ....... James A. Thomson 763 NOTES Minnesota v. Dickerson:What You Feel Is What You Get, With The Magic Words ........ Tracey A. Chriske 811 O'Neill v. Commissioner: Misplaced Trust ........ William P Martin 11 841 Loper v. New York City Police Department: A First Amendment Right To Beg ......... ......... Christie L. Sheppard 853 The Road to Nowhere: TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources .................................... Allison M. Steiner 873 STUDENT ARTICLE The Federal Tax Problems Posed by Durable Powers of Attorney Which are Ambiguous as to the Agent's Authority to Make Gifts ......... Valerie Finn-DeLuca 891 IN MEMORIAM KENNETH R. SIMMONDS by Roger D. Billings, Jr.* "Kenneth Simmonds bridged the cultural and legal worlds of the U.S. and Great Britain. He was a genuine asset to our law school as a visiting professor and afterward he continued to make professional and personal contributions to NKU person- nel. It was a privilege for me to know him. I know the NKU legal community feels a keen sense of loss." Leon Boothe President,Northern Kentucky University On December 19, 1983, several Chase professors gathered around a table to interview Kenneth R.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Reports
    Job: 539BV$ Take: SPN1 03-24-05 13:34:52 The dashed line indicates the top edge of the book. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UNITED STATES REPORTS 539 OCT. TERM 2002 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The dashed line indicates the bottom edge of the book. This camera copy was created for books with spines up to 31⁄4Љ wide. For smaller books, it must be centered on the spine and trimmed left and right as needed. 539BV$TITL 03-24-05 13:42:24 UNITED STATES REPORTS VOLUME 539 CASES ADJUDGED IN THE SUPREME COURT AT OCTOBER TERM, 2002 June 2 Through October 2, 2003 Together With Opinion of Individual Justice in Chambers End of Term FRANK D. WAGNER reporter of decisions WASHINGTON : 2005 Printed on Uncoated Permanent Printing Paper For sale by the U. S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328 539BV$ Unit: $UII [07-15-05 11:38:53] PGT: FRT Errata In Escambia County v. McMillan, 466 U. S. 48 (1984) (per curiam),it should appear that Thomas R. Santurri argued the motion of certain appel- lants to dismiss the appeal, sua sponte, at the invitation of the Court. 502 U. S. iv, NOTE 1, line 6: add the sentence ‘‘He was presented to the Court on November 1, 1991.’’ between ‘‘1991’’ and ‘‘See’’. ii 539BV$ Unit: UIII [04-26-05 12:02:49] PGT: FRT JUSTICES of the SUPREME COURT during the time of these reports WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST, Chief Justice. JOHN PAUL STEVENS, Associate Justice. SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR, Associate Justice. ANTONIN SCALIA, Associate Justice. ANTHONY M.
    [Show full text]
  • October Term, 1964
    OCTOBER TERM, 1964 STATISTICS Original Appellate Miscella- Total neous Number of cases on dockets 11 1, 247 1, 404 2, 662 Cases disposed of 2 1, 027 1, 151 2, 180 Remaining on dockets 9 220 253 482 Cases disposed of—Appellate Docket : By written opinions 103 By per curiam opinions or orders 133 By motion to dismiss or per stipulation (merits cases) 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 791 Cases disposed of—Miscellaneous Docket: By written opinions 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 927 By denial or withdrawal of other applications 178 By granting of other applications 1 By per curiam dismissal of appeals 22 By other per curiam opinions or orders 16 By transfer to Appellate Docket 7 sTumber of written opinions 91 sTumber of printed per curiam opinions 17 sfumber of petitions for certiorari granted (Appellate) 116 dumber of appeals in which jurisdiction was noted or post- poned 34 dumber of admissions to bar 2, 735 REFERENCE INDEX GENERAL:. Court convened October 5, 1964 and adjourned June 7, 1965. Johnson, President—Court met at 10:30 a.m., entertained motions for admission, and adjourned for the purpose of attending Inauguration (January 20, 1965) 157 Hoover, President, Death announced and Court adjourned without transacting further business (October 20, 1964— 1:09 p.m.) 60 n GENERAL—Continued Pttg » Frankfurter, J., Death (February 22, 1965) announced March 1, 1965. Court attended private memorial serv- ices at residence in Washington 181 Burton, J., Death (October 28, 1964) announced Novem- ber 9, 1964. Court attended memorial proceedings in Washington 72 Burton, J., Resolutions of Bar presented 313 Minton, J., Chief Justice's remarks re death.
    [Show full text]