DOCSLIB.ORG

Anthony Kennedy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Anthony Kennedy Anthony Kennedy Anthony McLeod Kennedy (born July 23, 1936) is a retired American lawyer and jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Anthony Kennedy the United States from 1988 until his retirement in 2018. He was nominated to the court in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan, and sworn in on February 18, 1988. After the retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor in 2006, he was the swing vote on many of the Roberts Court's 5–4 decisions. Born in Sacramento, California, Kennedy took over his father's legal practice in Sacramento after graduating from Harvard Law School. In 1975, President Gerald Ford appointed Kennedy to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In November 1987, after two failed attempts at nominating a successor to Associate Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., President Reagan nominated Kennedy to the Supreme Court. Kennedy won unanimous confirmation from the United States Senate in February 1988. Following the death of Antonin Scalia in February 2016, Kennedy became the Senior Associate Justice of the Court; he remained the Senior Associate Justice until his July 2018 retirement. Kennedy retired during the presidency of Donald Trump and was succeeded by his former law clerk, Brett Kavanaugh. Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Kennedy authored the majority opinion in several important cases, including Boumediene v. Bush, Citizens United v. FEC, and four gay rights cases the United States (Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, United States v. Windsor, and In office Obergefell v. Hodges). He also co-authored the plurality opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. February 18, 1988 – July 31, 2018 Nominated by Ronald Reagan Contents Preceded by Lewis F. Powell Jr. Early life and education Succeeded by Brett Kavanaugh Early career Judge of the United States Court of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Supreme Court of the United States In office Nomination and confirmation May 30, 1975 – February 18, 1988 Tenure and analysis Conservative criticism Nominated by Gerald Ford Internationalism Preceded by Charles Merton Merrill Jurisprudence Abortion Succeeded by Pamela Ann Rymer Capital punishment Personal details Environment Gay rights and homosexuality Born Anthony McLeod Kennedy Gun issues July 23, 1936 Habeas corpus Religious liberty Sacramento, California, U.S. Super PACs Spouse(s) Mary Davis (m. 1963) Other issues Children 3 Public speaking and teaching Personal life Education Stanford University (BA) See also Harvard University (LLB) Notes London School of References Economics Further reading Signature External links Military service Early life and education Allegiance United States Branch/service United States Army Kennedy was born and raised in an Irish Catholic family in Sacramento, California.[1] He was the son of Anthony J. Kennedy, an attorney with a Years of 1961–1962 reputation for influence in the California State Legislature, and Gladys (née service McLeod), who participated in many local civic activities.[2] As a boy, Kennedy came into contact with prominent politicians of the day, such as Unit California Army National California Governor and future Chief Justice of the United States Earl Warren. As a young man, Kennedy served as a page in the California State Guard Senate. Kennedy attended C. K. McClatchy High School, where he was an honors student and graduated in 1954.[3][4] Following in his mother's footsteps, Kennedy enrolled at Stanford University where he developed an interest in constitutional law. After spending his senior year at the London School of Economics, Kennedy graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Stanford in 1958 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science.[5] Kennedy then attended Harvard Law School, where he graduated cum laude with a Bachelor of Laws in 1961.[6] Early career Kennedy was in private practice in San Francisco from 1961 to 1963. In 1963, following his father's death, he took over his father's Sacramento practice, which he operated until 1975.[3] From 1965 to 1988, he was a Professor of Constitutional Law at McGeorge School of Law, at the University of the Pacific.[5] During Kennedy's time as a California law professor and attorney, he helped California Governor Ronald Reagan draft a state tax proposal.[3] Kennedy has served in numerous positions during his career, including the California Army National Guard in 1961 and the board of the Federal Judicial Center from 1987 to 1988. He also served on two committees of the Judicial Conference of the United States: the Advisory Panel on Financial Disclosure Reports and Judicial Activities (subsequently renamed the Advisory Committee on Codes of Conduct) from 1979 to 1987, and the Committee on Pacific Territories from 1979 to 1990, which he chaired from 1982 to 1990.[7] U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit On March 3, 1975, upon Reagan's recommendation,[3] President Gerald Ford nominated Kennedy to the seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that had been vacated by Charles Merton Merrill. Kennedy was unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate on March 20 and received his commission on March 24, 1975.[8] Supreme Court of the United States Nomination and confirmation On November 11, 1987, President Reagan nominated Kennedy to the Supreme Court seat vacated by Lewis F. Powell Jr., who had announced his retirement in late June.[9] In July, Reagan nominated Robert Bork, who was rejected 42—58 by the Senate on October 23.[10] The President’s next nominee, Douglas Ginsburg,[11][12] withdrew his name from consideration on November 7 after admitting to marijuana use,[13] and Senate Judiciary Committee member Patrick Leahy said that if Reagan’s next nominee was unacceptable to Senate Democrats,[a] they President Reagan and Kennedy would refuse hearings for any candidate until after the 1988 presidential election[15] – a meeting in the Oval Office on precursor to Mitch McConnell’s refusal in 2016, twenty-eight years later, to hold hearings for November 11, 1987 Merrick Garland. Kennedy was then subjected to an unprecedentedly thorough investigation of his background,[16] which he easily passed. In a Ninth Circuit dissent that Kennedy wrote before joining the Supreme Court, he criticized police for bribing a child into showing them where the child's mother hid drugs. Considering such conduct offensive and destructive of the family, Kennedy wrote that "indifference to personal liberty is but the precursor of the state's hostility to it."[17] Kennedy wrote an article the year before, however, about judicial restraint, and the following excerpt from it was read aloud at his confirmation hearing: One can conclude that certain essential, or fundamental, rights should exist in any just society. It does not follow that each of those essential rights is one that we as judges can enforce under the written Constitution. The Due Process Clause is not a guarantee of every right that should inhere in an ideal system. Many argue that a just society grants a right to engage in homosexual conduct. If that view is accepted, the Bowers decision in effect says the State of Georgia has the right to make a wrong decision—wrong in the sense that it violates some people's views of rights in a just society. We can extend that slightly to say that Georgia's right to be wrong in matters not specifically controlled by the Constitution is a necessary component of its own political processes. Its citizens have the political liberty to direct the governmental process to make decisions that might be wrong in the ideal sense, subject to correction in the ordinary political process.[18] Kennedy said about Griswold v. Connecticut, a privacy case about the use of contraceptives, "I really think I would like to draw the line and not talk about the Griswold case so far as its reasoning or its result."[19] He also discussed "a zone of liberty, a zone of protection, a line that's drawn where the individual can tell the Government, 'Beyond this line you may not go.'"[20][21] His hearings before the Senate judiciary committee began on December 14,[22][23] and lasted just three consecutive days.[24] When the Senate voted on Kennedy's nomination, he received bipartisan support. Maureen Hoch of PBS wrote that he "virtually sailed through the confirmation process and was widely viewed by conservatives and liberals alike as balanced and fair".[25] The U.S. Senate confirmed him on February 3, 1988, by a vote of 97 to 0.[21] Absent from the vote were three Democrats: Paul Simon and Al Gore were campaigning and Joe Biden was ill.[26] Attorney General Edwin Meese presented Kennedy's commission to the Court in a swearing-in ceremony on February 18, 1988.[27] Tenure and analysis Although appointed by a Republican president, Kennedy was not easily pigeonholed ideologically; he had a reputation for looking at cases individually instead of deciding them on the basis of a rigid ideology.[3] Vanity Fair quoted several former Supreme Court clerks as indicating that they believe Kennedy was often swayed by the opinions of his clerks, including his ruling on Roe v Wade.[28] One clerk derisively stated that "the premise is that he can't think by himself, and that he can be manipulated by someone in his second year of law school". This notion also led the Federalist Society to target Kennedy with more conservative clerks, believing this would make Kennedy more conservative. Two of his former clerks, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, eventually became Supreme Court justices. Conservative pundit
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lower Courts of the United States
    68 U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL include the Administrative Assistant to of procedure to be followed by the the Chief Justice, the Clerk, the Reporter lower courts of the United States. of Decisions, the Librarian, the Marshal, Court Term The term of the Court the Director of Budget and Personnel, begins on the first Monday in October the Court Counsel, the Curator, the and lasts until the first Monday in Director of Data Systems, and the Public October of the next year. Approximately 8,000 cases are filed with the Court in Information Officer. the course of a term, and some 1,000 Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate applications of various kinds are filed jurisdiction has been conferred upon the each year that can be acted upon by a Supreme Court by various statutes under single Justice. the authority given Congress by the Access to Facilities The Supreme Court Constitution. The basic statute effective is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 4:30 at this time in conferring and controlling p.m., Monday through Friday, except on jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may Federal legal holidays. Unless the Court be found in 28 U.S.C. 1251, 1253, or Chief Justice orders otherwise, the 1254, 1257–1259, and various special Clerk’s office is open from 9 a.m. to 5 statutes. Congress has no authority to p.m., Monday through Friday, except on change the original jurisdiction of this Federal legal holidays. The library is Court. open to members of the bar of the Court, Rulemaking Power Congress has from attorneys for the various Federal time to time conferred upon the departments and agencies, and Members Supreme Court power to prescribe rules of Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • An Empirical Study of the Ideologies of Judges on the Unites States
    JUDGED BY THE COMPANY YOU KEEP: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE IDEOLOGIES OF JUDGES ON THE UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS Corey Rayburn Yung* Abstract: Although there has been an explosion of empirical legal schol- arship about the federal judiciary, with a particular focus on judicial ide- ology, the question remains: how do we know what the ideology of a judge actually is? For federal courts below the U.S. Supreme Court, legal aca- demics and political scientists have offered only crude proxies to identify the ideologies of judges. This Article attempts to cure this deficiency in empirical research about the federal courts by introducing a new tech- nique for measuring the ideology of judges based upon judicial behavior in the U.S. courts of appeals. This study measures ideology, not by subjec- tively coding the ideological direction of case outcomes, but by determin- ing the degree to which federal appellate judges agree and disagree with their liberal and conservative colleagues at both the appellate and district court levels. Further, through regression analysis, several important find- ings related to the Ideology Scores emerge. First, the Ideology Scores in this Article offer substantial improvements in predicting civil rights case outcomes over the leading measures of ideology. Second, there were very different levels and heterogeneity of ideology among the judges on the studied circuits. Third, the data did not support the conventional wisdom that Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush appointed uniquely ideological judges. Fourth, in general judges appointed by Republican presidents were more ideological than those appointed by Democratic presidents.
    [Show full text]
  • Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Mourns Passing of Judge Pamela Ann Rymer
    N E W S R E L E A S E September 22, 2011 Contact: David Madden (415) 355-8800 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Mourns Passing of Judge Pamela Ann Rymer SAN FRANCISCO – The Hon. Pamela Ann Rymer, a distinguished judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, died Wednesday, September 21, 2011, after a long illness. She was 69. Judge Rymer was diagnosed with cancer in 2009 and had been in failing health in recent months. She passed with friends at her bedside. “Judge Rymer maintained her calendar throughout her illness,” observed Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. “Her passion for the law and dedication to the work of the court was inspiring. She will be sorely missed by all of her colleagues.” Judge Rymer served on the federal bench at both the appellate and trial levels for more than 28 years. Nominated by President Reagan, she was appointed a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on February 24, 1983. She was elevated to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals by President George H.W. Bush, receiving her commission on May 22, 1989. During her 22 years on the appellate court, Judge Rymer sat on more than 800 merits panels and authored 335 panel opinions. She last heard oral arguments in July and her most recent opinion was filed in August. Her productivity was remarkable and every case received her full attention, colleagues said. "Each case was intrinsically important to her. Finding the right answer for the parties and doing the law correctly were foremost in her mind in every matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Files Folder Title:Counsel's Office January 1984- June 1984 (5) Box: 7
    Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Baker, James A.: Files Folder Title: Counsel’s Office January 1984- June 1984 (5) Box: 7 To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ ' ·.: ,· ·· . -·· -.. -·: • . ...: . : . > "~ .. .. • .: . .. ... DEANE C. DAVIS 5 OYER AVENUE MONTPEt.IER, VERMONT 05602 December 20, 1983 The President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 ~De-ar- : :Mr. President:. · This letter is in reference to the forthcoming vacancy ... ·. in the office of. Federal. District Judge for Vermont, occasioned by the retirement of Judge James Holden. Senator Stafford tells me that he is to recommend several. names including that of Lawrence A. Wright of. _Hines .burg._.:. -. I strongly endorse Mr. Wright. Mr. Wright is highly qualified for this posi~ion on all counts: ability, age, judici~l temperament and trial experience. When I was Governor of Vermont I selected Mr. Wright for appointment to the office of Vermont Tax Commissioner. The Legislature had just passed a new and highly complicated Sales Tax and a highly qualified man was needed to set up and administer the new system. He performed in a superb manner. His· extensive experience with the Internal Revenue Servic e as a trial attorney eminently qualifies him to become a judge. He is fully at home in the court room.
    [Show full text]
  • Academic CV Examples
    SAMPLE CV JOAN ARC The University of Chicago Law School 1111 60th St. • Chicago, IL 60637 (773) 834-4444 • [email protected] EDUCATION YALE LAW SCHOOL • New Haven, CT • J.D., 2018 • Yale Law Journal, Articles Editor • Yale Journal of International Law, Articles Editor • ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project • Immigration Clinic GOUCHER COLLEGE • Baltimore, MD • B.A. in International Relations, with honors, 2016 • Honors: Phi Beta Kappa, Phi Beta Kappa Award for Outstanding Paper, Dean’s Scholarship, Munce Scholarship for International Relations, Class of 1906 Fellowship, German Embassy Language Award • Amnesty International Goucher Group, Co-President • Research Assistant, Professor Jane Bennett, Political Theory • Senior Thesis: Dilemmas of Transitional Justice and the Indeterminacy of Law: The Trial of the Former Bulgarian Communist Leader, Todor Zhivkov CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY • Cambridge, UK • Kaplan Scholar, 2018-2009 TEACHING AND RESEARCH INTERESTS • Primary interests: International Law, International Criminal Law, Comparative Law, Comparative Criminal Law, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure • Additional interests: Civil Procedure, Evidence, International Commercial Arbitration, International Organizations, Immigration Law, Human Rights Law, Criminal Justice PUBLICATIONS AND WORKS IN PROGRESS • Jury Sentencing as Democratic Practice, 89 VA. L. REV. 311 (2018), cited in Wright & Miller, 3 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Crim.2d 526 (West Supp. 2018) • Case Note, Sovereignty on Our Terms, 110 YALE L.J. 885 (2017), cited in In re Vitamins Litigation, No. 99-1978FH, 2005 WL 1049433 (D.D.C. June 20, 2017) • Book Review, 26 YALE J. INT’L L. 529 (2012) (reviewing WILLIAM SCHABAS, GENOCIDE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW (2013)) • Update of Current Legal Proceedings at the ICTY, 13 LEIDEN J. INT’L L.
    [Show full text]
  • The Art of Judging
    TENTH ANNUAL JUDICIAL SYMPOSIUM THE ART OF1 JUDGINGcelebrating0 1celebrating0 1celebrating0 ten years it’s 10th year our 10th year NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE 1CELEBRATING0 TEN YEARS Course Materials July 2014 All views, opinions and conclusions expressed are those of the authors and/or speakers, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion and/or policy of NFJE and its leadership. © 2014 by NFJE 55 West Monroe Street, Suite 2000 Chicago, Illinois 60603 All rights reserved. No part of this product may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the express written permission of NFJE unless such copying is expressly permitted by fed- eral copyright law. Produced in the United States of America Course Materials Table of Contents The Will of the People: ........................................................................................................................1 How Public Opinion Has Influenced the Supreme Court and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution Barry E. Friedman Court Funding—The New Normal .................................................................................................17 Robert N. Baldwin Financial Influences on the Judiciary .............................................................................................33 Honorable Wallace B. Jefferson Financial Influences on the Judiciary .............................................................................................67
    [Show full text]
  • Choosing the Next Supreme Court Justice: an Empirical Ranking of Judicial Performance†
    Choosing the Next Supreme Court Justice: † An Empirical Ranking of Judicial Performance Stephen Choi* ** Mitu Gulati † © 2004 Stephen Choi and Mitu Gulati. * Roger J. Traynor Professor, U.C. Berkeley Law School (Boalt Hall). ** Professor of Law, Georgetown University. Kindly e-mail comments to [email protected] and [email protected]. Erin Dengan, Édeanna Johnson-Chebbi, Margaret Rodgers, Rishi Sharma, Jennifer Dukart, and Alice Kuo provided research assistance. Kimberly Brickell deserves special thanks for her work. Aspects of this draft benefited from discussions with Alex Aleinikoff, Scott Baker, Lee Epstein, Tracey George, Prea Gulati, Vicki Jackson, Mike Klarman, Kim Krawiec, Kaleb Michaud, Un Kyung Park, Greg Mitchell, Jim Rossi, Ed Kitch, Paul Mahoney, Jim Ryan, Paul Stefan, George Triantis, Mark Seidenfeld, and Eric Talley. For comments on the draft itself, we are grateful to Michael Bailey, Suzette Baker, Bill Bratton, James Brudney, Steve Bundy, Brannon Denning, Phil Frickey, Michael Gerhardt, Steve Goldberg, Pauline Kim, Bill Marshall, Don Langevoort, Judith Resnik, Keith Sharfman, Steve Salop, Michael Seidman, Michael Solimine, Gerry Spann, Mark Tushnet, David Vladeck, Robin West, Arnold Zellner, Kathy Zeiler, Todd Zywicki and participants at workshops at Berkeley, Georgetown, Virginia, FSU, and UNC - Chapel Hill. Given the unusually large number of people who have e-mailed us with comments on this project, it is likely that there are some who we have inadvertently failed to thank. Our sincerest apologies to them. Disclosure: Funding for this project was provided entirely by our respective law schools. One of us was a law clerk to two of the judges in the sample: Samuel Alito of the Third Circuit and Sandra Lynch of the First Circuit.
    [Show full text]
  • President Bush's Judicial Nominations During the 101St and 102Nd
    Order Code 93-395 President Bush’s Judicial Nominations During the 101st and 102nd Congresses Updated March 29, 1993 Denis Steven Rutkus Specialist in American National Government Government Division President Bush’s Judicial Nominations During the 101st and 102nd Congresses Summary There are ten categories of courts (including the local courts of the District of Columbia) to which the President nominates judges. The following report provides background and statistics concerning President Bush’s judicial nominations in each court category as well as actions taken on those nominations by the United States Senate. Each of the report’s ten sections discusses the composition and jurisdiction of the court in question and notes the committee to which nominations to this court were referred when received by the Senate. Also, statistics on judicial nominations received by the Senate during the four years of the Bush Presidency are presented, including the following: ! Overall number of persons nominated, confirmed, and not confirmed to the court in question; ! Number of President Bush’s nominees currently sitting on the court; ! Breakdowns, for both the 101st and 102nd Congresses, of the number of nominations received by the Senate, confirmed, or failing to receive Senate confirmation. At the end of each section, a table lists President Bush’s pertinent court nominations during the 101st and 102nd Congresses, including nomination dates, hearing dates, dates reported out of committee, and dates of confirmation or other final Senate action. Contents Introduction ......................................................1 Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States....................5 Nominations to the U.S. Courts of Appeals..............................7 Nominations to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Legal History
    WESTERN LEGAL HISTORY THE JOURNAL OF THE NINTH JuDIcIAL CIRCUIT HISTORICAL SOCIETY VOLUME 12, NUMBER 2 SUMMER/FALL 1999 Western Legal History is published semiannually, in spring and fall, by the Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society, 125 S. Grand Avenue, Pasadena, California 91105, (626) 795-0266/fax (626) 229-7462. The journal explores, analyzes, and presents the history of law, the legal profession, and the courts- particularly the federal courts-in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Western Legal History is sent to members of the NJCHS as well as members of affiliated legal historical societies in the Ninth Circuit. Membership is open to all. Membership dues (individuals and institutions): Patron, $1,000 or more; Steward, $750-$999; Sponsor, $500-$749; Grantor, $250-$499; Sustaining, $100- $249; Advocate, $50-$99; Subscribing (nonmembers of the bench and bar, lawyers in practice fewer than five years, libraries, and academic institutions), $25449; Membership dues (law firms and corporations): Founder, $3,000 or more; Patron, $1,000-$2,999; Steward, $750-$999; Sponsor, $500-$749; Grantor, $250-$499. For information regarding membership, back issues of Western Legal History, and other society publications and programs, please write or telephone the editor. POSTMASTER: Please send change of address to: Editor Western Legal History 125 S. Grand Avenue Pasadena, California 91105 Western Legal History disclaims responsibility for statements made by authors and for accuracy of endnotes. Copyright, 01999, Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society ISSN 0896-2189 The Editorial Board welcomes unsolicited manuscripts, books for review, and recommendations for the journal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Ideologies of Law Clerks and Their Judges
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Economics 2016 The olitP ical Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges Adam Bonica Adam S. Chilton Jacob Goldin Kyle Rozema Maya Sen Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Adam Bonica, Adam S. Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema & Maya Sen, " The oP litical Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges" (Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics No. 754, 2016). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Political Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges Adam Bonica, Adam Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema, & Maya Sen∗ February 29, 2016 We study the political ideology of judicial law clerks using a novel dataset that combines the most comprehensive data sources on political ideology and the identity of U.S. federal law clerks. First, we examine the distribu- tion of clerks' ideology and find that clerks tend to be disproportionately liberal, with clerks on lower courts being more liberal on average than clerks for higher courts. Second, we find that judges tend to consistently hire clerks with similar ideologies and that those ideologies track available measures of the judge's own ideology.
    [Show full text]
  • For Publication United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PATRICIA HART, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 99-56472 v. D.C. No. CV-97-02082- LARRY G. MASSANARI, Acting TJH(ANx) Commissioner of Social Security Administration,* OPINION Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Arthur Nakazato, Magistrate Judge, Presiding Submitted March 5, 2001** Pasadena, California Filed September 24, 2001 Before: Alex Kozinski and Richard C. Tallman, Circuit Judges, and Frank Zapata, District Judge.*** Opinion by Judge Kozinski _________________________________________________________________ *Larry G. Massanari is substituted for his predecessor, Kenneth Apfel, as Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). **The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). ***The Honorable Frank Zapata, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation. 13439 13440 COUNSEL Lawrence D. Rohlfing, Esq., Rohlfing Law Firm, Santa Fe Springs, California, for the plaintiff-appellant. Kaladharan M.G. Nayar, Office of the Regional Attorney, Social Security Administration, San Francisco, California, for the defendant-appellant. _________________________________________________________________ OPINION KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge. Appellant's opening brief cites Rice v. Chater, No. 95- 35604, 1996 WL 583605 (9th Cir. Oct. 9, 1996). Rice is an 13441 unpublished disposition, not reported in the Federal Reporter except as a one-line entry in a long table of cases. See Deci- sions Without Published Opinions, 98 F.3d 1345, 1346 tbl. (9th Cir. 1996). The full text of the disposition can be obtained from our clerk's office, and is available on Westlaw#FC# and LEXIS#FC#.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
    Case: 17-2218 Document: 00117347455 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/03/2018 Entry ID: 6202997 United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 17-2218 JOSEPH A. BEBO, Petitioner, Appellant, v. SEAN MEDEIROS, Acting Superintendent, Respondent, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Patti B. Saris, U.S. District Judge] Before Lynch, Selya, and Lipez, Circuit Judges. Elizabeth Prevett, with whom Federal Defender Office was on brief, for petitioner. Thomas E. Bocian, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Bureau, with whom Maura Healey, Attorney General of Massachusetts, was on brief, for respondent. October 3, 2018 Case: 17-2218 Document: 00117347455 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/03/2018 Entry ID: 6202997 SELYA, Circuit Judge. With respect to federal habeas review of state criminal convictions, Congress has ordained an especially deferential standard of review, which compels us to look only at federal constitutional law as clearly established by the Supreme Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). This deferential standard sometimes results in situations in which a state court ruling may be deemed to pass constitutional muster on habeas review even though an identical federal court ruling might be deemed reversible error on direct review under circuit precedent. Thus, the question of what our circuit's case law would suggest is not before us in this habeas case. Based on Supreme Court case law, we conclude that the challenged state court ruling was neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. Consequently, we affirm the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition.
    [Show full text]