DOCSLIB.ORG

Career News Archives Format)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Career News Archives Format) October 26, 2017 Hanson Bridgett 1L Interview Workshop Attention 1Ls! The Hanson Bridgett 1L Interview Workshop for diverse first year students will be at McGeorge School of Law on Saturday, November 18, 2017 from 7:30 am - 1:45 pm. The Workshop schedule is as follows: 7:30-8:00 - Check-in / breakfast / networking 8:00-10:15 - Seminar Alumni Directory 10:30-11:00 - Quick preparation for practice interviews 11:00-12:30 - Practice interviews 12:00-1:45 - Networking lunch Job Search Resources Symplicity If you are interested in attending, please RSVP to Marisa Compesi ([email protected]) before the Friday, November 3rd deadline and attach a copy of your resume (in PDF Career News Archives format). Archive of Recorded If you have not already updated your resume to include your current CSO Presentations enrollment at the law school, make sure to do that before submitting your RSVP. Also, in your RSVP please include your student organization affiliation(s). Please note that space is limited in the Walk-In Hours: workshop and Hanson Bridgett will schedule practice interviews on a first-come, first-served basis. 11 AM - Noon & 4 - 5 PM, Monday - Thursday; This is a great opportunity to gain interview experience and to 11 AM - 1 PM, Friday network with leading attorneys in the area! Walk-in Hours for 3Ls Only: 12 PM-1 PM, Monday - Friday Call 530.752.6574 or email Upcoming 1L Summer Information Sessions [email protected] to schedule an appointment. First-year students interested in learning more about judicial externships and public interest/public sector internships should mark their calendars for the relevant presentations. All presentations will take place in Room 1301. October 27, noon-1pm (Judicial Externships) November 3, noon-1pm (Public Interest/Public Sector Internships) King Hall Small/Midsize Firm Fair Attention 2L and 3L students! On Thursday, November 2nd from 6:00 to 7:30 pm, Career Services will host the Fourth Annual Small and Midsize Firm Fair at King Hall. The event will kick-off at 6:00 pm with a meet-and-greet reception in the hallway outside Career Services where you will be able to speak with attorneys in a wide range of practice areas and drop off your resume with firms of interest. You are invited and highly encouraged to take advantage of this great opportunity to meet potential employers right here at the law school. Many of these firms have hired King Hall students for summer law clerk positions and/or as associates. Keep an eye out in the coming weeks for invitations and a list of firms who will attend. Save the Date! Sacramento County Bar Association and Bay Area-- Diversity Fellowship Information Sessions Are you a diverse 1L interested in practicing in a Sacramento or Bay Area law firm this summer? The Sacramento County Bar Association Diversity Fellowship and the Bay Area Diversity Fellowship are great opportunities for UC Davis 1Ls to experience a private law firm or corporate setting in Sacramento or the Bay Area as well as reap the benefits of hearing from various attorneys and judges about multiple aspects of the legal profession. These are PAID positions. To learn more, please join us for the following fellowship presentations: SCBA Diversity Fellowship and Bay Area Diversity Fellowship Past Fellows Panel - Thursday, November 16th, 12:00-1:00 PM, Room 1301 Past fellows from King Hall will speak about their experiences with the SCBA and Bay Area fellowships (including application and interview tips, etc.) This session will not be recorded. SCBA Diversity Fellowship Information Panel - Friday, November 17th, 12:00-1:00 PM, Room 1002 Meet committee members and practicing attorneys, Kimberly Lucia (King Hall '09) and Mark Spring, to learn more about how the committee reviews applications, conducts interviews, and makes selections. Please note that SCBA defines one as diverse for this program as follows: "a person of a racial or ethnic group that is under-represented in the legal profession, LGBT, a person with a disability, or a person that can otherwise articulate how s/he is diverse and how his/her diversity is under-represented in the legal profession." Capitol Weekly's Conference on Immigration California stands at odds with Federal immigration laws and policies. As the Trump administration ramps up ICE activity and seeks to build a wall between Mexico and the United States, California lawmakers are offering resistance and opposition at every turn, most recently with the passage of SB54, the California Sanctuary State Bill. What happens when the most-populous state in the US takes on the Feds in one of the hot-button issues of the day? A CONFERENCE ON IMMIGRATION will be held from 9:15AM - 3:15PM, Thursday November 9, 2017 at the Sacramento Historic Masonic Temple, Grand Ballroom, 1123 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. Regular registration rate is $199. Registration includes lunch and all conference materials. For information regarding registration, including fee waivers, contact Kathy Brown, 916 444 7665 or [email protected]. Capitol Weekly's Conference on Immigration will feature four panels examining the current Immigration debate: Labor and the Economy: From farmworkers to highly-skilled technology experts, immigrants play a huge role in the California economy. We'll look at the numbers, benefits and costs of immigration. Sanctuary: California's new Sanctuary State bill expands protections that already existed in many California cities. What are the real-world impacts of this and other Sanctuary laws? The Impact on Families and Communities: What impact are travel bans, changes to DACA, stepped up ICE raids and other Trump administration policies having on immigrants and their communities? Look Ahead: The immigration debate around Proposition 187 profoundly changed California; what will be the ultimate impact of the Trump administration's policies - and the state's reaction to them? Confirmed speakers include: Chiqui Cartagena, Univision Jennie Pasquarella, ACLU of Southern California Dan Morain, Sacramento Bee Sandra Diaz, SEIU Ted Lempert, Chidren Now Hector Barajas, Merino, Barajas & Allen Rob Sanger, California Manufacturers and Technology Association Elizabeth Aguilera, CALmatters Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Silicon Valley Leadership Group Jason Resnick, Western Growers Association Arnoldo Torres, Torres and Torres Holly Cooper, UC Davis School of Law Mike Madrid, GrassrootsLab Rich Ehisen, State Net Capitol Reports Opportunities in Labor & Employment The National Lawyers Guild Labor and Employment Committee is hosting a conference call with representatives from the SEIU and the Peggy Browning Fund to learn about summer and post-grad job opportunities. Law students of all years are invited to learn about paid summer and post-graduate fellowships in workers' rights. Thursday, November 2, 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. EST Dial-in Number: 1-218-844-1930 Participant Access Code: 3221991 Featuring: Kimberly Sánchez, Ethics Ombudsperson & Assistant General Counsel, SEIU Mary Anne Moffa, Executive Director, Peggy Browning Fund Call Logistics: Due to the large number of participants, we ask that all students mute themselves when joining the call. To make the call interactive, students are encouraged to email or gchat questions in advance and during the call to [email protected]. Please include your name, school, and class year. Summer Legal Ethics Fellowship FASPE (Fellowships at Auschwitz for the Study of Professional Ethics) is now accepting applications for its 2018 Law program. FASPE Law is a fully-funded, two-week summer program that uses the conduct of lawyers and judges in Nazi Germany as a launching point for an intensive study of contemporary legal ethics. FASPE Law is predicated upon the power of place. Fellows visit Auschwitz and other sites in Germany and Poland where they consider how to apply the lessons of history to the ethical challenges they will face in their careers. In 2018, the program will take place from Monday, May 21 to Friday, June 1. (Fellows are expected to arrive in Europe by Sunday, May 20.) All program costs are covered, including the equivalent of round- trip travel from New York to Europe, as well as all European travel, lodging, and food. FASPE Law Fellows travel and share some seminars with Fellows in the FASPE Business and Journalism programs. FASPE Law is open to current JD and LLM students and those who received a JD or LLM between May 2016 and January 2018. It is designed to address ethical challenges in all fields of law, including the private sector, public interest organizations, and the government. To learn more about FASPE and to apply, visit: http://www.faspe-ethics.org/law/. Completed applications are due by Thursday, January 11, 2018. Reproductive Justice Fellowship Are you a current 3L or recent law school graduate who is passionate about reproductive rights and justice? And want to gain hands-on policy and advocacy experience? If so, apply today to be a Reproductive Justice Fellow! If/When/How is now accepting applications for the 2018-19 Reproductive Justice Fellowship Program (RJFP), which places newly graduated lawyers at nonprofits for a one-year, policy-focused fellowship in reproductive health, rights, and justice work. The RJFP now includes Federal, State, and HIV fellowships, with placement locations in Atlanta, GA; Oakland, CA; Pittsburgh, PA; Seattle, WA; and Washington, D.C. For more information and instructions for how to apply, download the RJFP Application here. The deadline for applications is November 1, 2017.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • The Federalist Society
    2014 ANNUAL REPORT The Federalist Society Law schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centralized and uniform society. While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law. The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities. This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors. In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community. Letter from the President The Federalist Society enjoyed great success in 2014. This past year has seen intended the legislature to be the most powerful branch of government. In its the creation and launching of many new initiatives, as well as the achievement present form, most would say it is not.
    [Show full text]
  • JUSTICE for ALL. NO EXCEPTIONS. That’S the American Way People for the American Way Foundation  Introduction
    THE HUMAN TOLL How Individual Americans Have Fared at the Hands of Bush Judges JUSTICE FOR ALL. NO EXCEPTIONS. That’s the American Way People For the American www.PFAW.org Way Foundation 1 Introduction As President Bush nears the end of his second term with record low approval ratings, the American public has rendered a clear verdict: the policies of the Bush administration have largely failed at home and abroad. Yet by one important measure that pollsters and pundits often ignore, Bush has been an over-achiever: during his administration, 314 judges have been confirmed to lifetime appoints to the federal bench, including the two Bush nominees who now sit on the United States Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito. The impact that President Bush has had on the federal courts may be his most enduring legacy, at least domestically. After leaders to come have figured out what to do about $4.00 gasoline, $4 trillion in debt, a battered economy and a war that has damaged our standing in the world, Bush’s judges will still be safely ensconced on the federal bench, and on the highest court in the land. What has that meant for individual Americans? And what will that mean in the future? People For the American Way Foundation has documented in a series of reports the damage that Bush- nominated judges have done to the Constitution – and to Americans’ ability to seek and expect justice in the federal courts when challenging unlawful treatment by corporations, government agencies, and other powerful entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Oral History Interview of Ninth Circuit Judge Carlos Bea by Ben Feuer, Esq
    Oral History Interview Of Ninth Circuit Judge Carlos Bea by Ben Feuer, Esq. October 20191 Ben Feuer We are now recording the oral history of Carlos Tiburcio Bea, a Circuit Judge on the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Today is Tuesday, October 15, 2019, and the time is approximately 4:15pm in San Francisco. So, let me begin by thanking you on behalf of the Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society for taking your time to give us a description and an oral recollection of the life and times of Carlos Tiburcio Bea. Judge Bea It's a pleasure. Ben Feuer Excellent. For the future listeners and readers of this oral history, Judge Bea was described in an article by the Los Angeles Daily Journal recently as the most interesting man on the Ninth Circuit, referencing a contemporary advertising campaign, so we hope to explore what about Judge Bea's life has made him so interesting. Or is it just that the other Ninth Circuit judges are so boring? We'll find out. Stay tuned for the next few hours to learn more. So thank you Judge Bea. Let's start this oral history at the beginning, as Lewis Carroll wrote. Where and when were you born? Judge Bea I was born in San Sebastian, Spain on April 18, 1934. My father and mother and older brother were living in a house in San Sebastian, a house we still have, and I visit every year. Ben Feuer What kind of work did your father engage in? Judge Bea My father was privileged, he didn't work.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit As of 10/8/2020
    Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 10/8/2020 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Jeffrey R. Howard 0 Kermit Victor Lipez (Snr) Sandra L. Lynch Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby (Snr) 0 Jon David Levy George Z. Singal (Snr) Nancy Torresen John A. Woodcock, Jr. (Snr) United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs 0 Denise Jefferson Casper Timothy S. Hillman Mark G. Mastroianni George A. O'Toole, Jr. (Snr) Michael A. Ponsor (Snr) Patti B. Saris F. Dennis Saylor Leo T. Sorokin Richard G. Stearns Indira Talwani Mark L. Wolf (Snr) Douglas P. Woodlock (Snr) William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Paul J. Barbadoro 0 Joseph N. Laplante Steven J. McAuliffe (Snr) Landya B. McCafferty Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 10/8/2020 United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Francisco Augusto Besosa 0 Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez Daniel R. Dominguez (Snr) Jay A. Garcia-Gregory (Snr) Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez (Snr) United States District Court District of Rhode Island Mary M. Lisi (Snr) 0 John J. McConnell, Jr. William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Jose A. Cabranes 0 Guido Calabresi (Snr) Denny Chin Christopher F. Droney (Ret) Peter W. Hall Pierre N. Leval (Snr) Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Gerard E. Lynch (Snr) Jon O. Newman (Snr) Barrington D. Parker, Jr. (Snr) Reena Raggi (Snr) Robert D. Sack (Snr) John M.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Report ______
    No. 14-55873 [DC 2:11-cv-09916-SJO-SS] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ________________________________ Charles Nichols, Plaintiff-Appellant v. EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., in his official capacity as Governor of California and KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. 2:11-cv-09916-SJO-SS The Honorable S. James Otero, Judge ________________________________ STATUS REPORT ________________________________ Charles Nichols PO Box 1302 Redondo Beach, CA 90278 Tel. No. (424) 634-7381 e-mail: [email protected] In Pro Per STATUS REPORT In response to this Court’s July 21, 2015, ORDER, Plaintiff-Appellant Charles Nichols files this Status Report concurrent with his unopposed motion to extend the present stay which expires on November 9, 2015 until this Court’s en banc resolution of Peruta v. County Of San Diego, No. 10-56971 “Peruta” and Richards v. Prieto, No. 11-16255 “Richards”. 1. Peruta and Richards were combined for the purpose of oral arguments before an en banc panel of this court which took place on June 16, 2015. 2. In response to questioning by Circuit Judges Richard Paez and Carlos Bea, California Solicitor General, Edward DuMont conceded that the “core right” of the Second Amendment extends to public places beyond the curtilage of one’s home but qualified his concession by stating that the core Second Amendment right does not extend to concealed carry in public. This concession is highly relevant to Plaintiff-Appellant Nichols present case as his is purely an Open Carry case.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Nominations President Bush's Confirmed Judicial
    http://leahy.senate.gov/issues/nominations/index.html Judicial Nominations "The Constitution requires that the President seek the Senate’s advice and consent in making appointments to the federal courts. As a senator and as the Democratic leader of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I take this responsibility very seriously." -- Senator Patrick Leahy, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee 316 Of President Bush's Article III Judicial Nominees Have Been Confirmed. (As of September 29, 2008) Read a complete list of President Bush's confirmed nominees. http://leahy.senate.gov/issues/nominations/confirmednominees.htm President Bush's Confirmed Judicial Nominations Court of Supreme Court Circuit Court District Court International Nominees Nominees Nominees Trade As of September 29, 2008 Supreme Court Nominees 2. Samuel A. Alito, Associate Justice, Jan. 31, 2006 1. John G. Roberts, Chief Justice, Sept. 29, 2005 (vote (vote 58-42) 78-22) Circuit Court Nominees 61. Raymond Kethledge, 6th Circuit, June 24, 31. Franklin van Antwerpen, 3rd Circuit, May 20, 2008 (voice vote) 2004 (vote 96-0)30. D. Michael Fisher, 3rd Circuit, 60. Helene N. White, 6th Circuit, June 24, 2008 Dec. 9, 2003 (voice vote) (vote 63-32) 29. Carlos Bea, 9th Circuit, Sept. 29, 2003 (vote 59. G. Steven Agee, 4th Circuit, May 20, 2008 86-0) (vote 96-0) 28. Steven Colloton, 8th Circuit, Sept. 4, 2003 58. Catharina Haynes, 5th Circuit, April 10, 2008 (vote 94-1) (unanimous consent) 27. Allyson K. Duncan, 4th Circuit, July 17, 2003 57. John Daniel Tinder, 7th Circuit, December 18, (vote 93-0) 2007(vote 93-0) 26. Richard Wesley, 2nd Circuit, June 11, 2003 56.
    [Show full text]
  • The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies 2008 Annual Report
    The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies 2008 Annual Report “The Courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise will instead of JUDGMENT, the consequences would be the substitution of their pleasure for that of the legislative body.” The Federalist 78 THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY aw schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a L form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centralized and uniform society. While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law. The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities. This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors. In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2021
    Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 3/3/2021 International Trade United States Court of International Trade Timothy Reif 0 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Jeffrey R. Howard 0 Kermit Victor Lipez (Snr) Sandra L. Lynch Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby (Snr) 0 Jon David Levy George Z. Singal (Snr) Nancy Torresen John A. Woodcock, Jr. (Snr) United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs 0 Denise Jefferson Casper Timothy S. Hillman Mark G. Mastroianni George A. O'Toole, Jr. (Snr) Michael A. Ponsor (Snr) Patti B. Saris F. Dennis Saylor Leo T. Sorokin Richard G. Stearns Indira Talwani Mark L. Wolf (Snr) Douglas P. Woodlock (Snr) William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Paul J. Barbadoro 0 Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 3/3/2021 Joseph N. Laplante Steven J. McAuliffe (Snr) Landya B. McCafferty United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Francisco Augusto Besosa 0 Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez Daniel R. Dominguez (Snr) Jay A. Garcia-Gregory (Snr) Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. United States District Court District of Rhode Island Mary M. Lisi (Snr) 0 John J. McConnell, Jr. William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Joseph F. Bianco 0 Jose A. Cabranes Guido Calabresi (Snr) Denny Chin Christopher F. Droney (Ret) Peter W. Hall Pierre N. Leval (Snr) Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Gerard E. Lynch (Snr) Jon O. Newman (Snr) Barrington D.
    [Show full text]
  • Azela 9Th Circuit Organization Letter
    Page 1 August 22, 2017 Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein: CC: Members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee We write in strong opposition to legislative proposals to divide the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, including S.276, the Judicial Administration and Improvement Act of 2017, and S. 295, the Circuit Court of Appeals Restructuring and Modernization Act. Special interests, dissatisfied with certain rulings, have long sought to divide the Ninth Circuit in an effort to obtain different rulings. And, after the Ninth Circuit struck down the Administration’s “travel ban,” Hawaii v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2017), and a California district court enjoined the President’s order withholding Federal funds from cities that failed to enforce immigration laws, Cnty. of Santa Clara v. Trump, Nos. 17-cv-00574 & 17-cv-00485, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62871 (N.D. Cal. April 25, 2017), President Trump attacked the Ninth Circuit. In fact, President Trump has led the recent charge to split the Ninth Circuit because he perceives it to be hostile to his unconstitutional agenda. Such results-driven considerations should not dictate the structure of the judiciary. Allowing this ideological campaign to overhaul the judicial branch threatens the integrity and independence of the judicial system. Further, if legislation to divide the Ninth Circuit is enacted, it will enable ideologically driven forum shopping aimed at eroding critical constitutional rights and legal protections that affect workers, civil rights, consumers, and the environment. Not only does such an obvious ideological driven campaign threaten the integrity of the judicial system, but there is no compelling reason to split the jurisdiction and to incur the substantial costs that such a split will generate.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision Making in Us Federal Specialized
    THE CONSEQUENCES OF SPECIALIZATION: DECISION MAKING IN U.S. FEDERAL SPECIALIZED COURTS Ryan J. Williams A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Kevin T. McGuire Isaac Unah Jason M. Roberts Virginia Gray Brett W. Curry © 2019 Ryan J. Williams ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Ryan J. Williams: The Consequences of Specialization: Decision Making in U.S. Federal Specialized Courts (Under the direction of Kevin T. McGuire) Political scientists have devoted little attention to the role of specialized courts in the United States federal and state judicial systems. At the federal level, theories of judicial decision making and institutional structures widely accepted in discussions of the U.S. Supreme Court and other generalist courts (the federal courts of appeals and district courts) have seen little examination in the context of specialized courts. In particular, scholars are just beginning to untangle the relationship between judicial expertise and decision making, as well as to understand how specialized courts interact with the bureaucratic agencies they review and the litigants who appear before them. In this dissertation, I examine the consequences of specialization in the federal judiciary. The first chapter introduces the landscape of existing federal specialized courts. The second chapter investigates the patterns of recent appointments to specialized courts, focusing specifically on how the qualifications of specialized court judges compare to those of generalists. The third chapter considers the role of expertise in a specialized court, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and argues that expertise enhances the ability for judges to apply their ideologies to complex, technical cases.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 US COURT of APPEALS for the NINTH CIRCUIT Judicial Profile
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Judicial Profile: Carlos Bea COURT: Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals APPOINTED: 2003, by President George W. Bush BORN: April 18, 1934 LAW SCHOOL: Stanford Law School PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE: San Francisco Superior Court Bench, 1990-2003 After long wait, Bea ascends federal bench Jason Hoppin The Recorder November 18, 2003 Carlos Bea can breathe a little bit easier now. Not only are his chambers in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals much larger than his old haunt at the San Francisco Superior Court, but he no longer has to wonder what kind of federal judge he'd have made. He's about to find out. The longtime litigator and dedicated Republican had been on the superior court a little more than a year when the first President Bush tapped him for the Northern District federal bench. His nomination died without a hearing, however, and Bea waited a decade before being offered his current post. The former Olympian is still fit at 69 years old. The white hair, dark complexion and crisp shirts project the dignity of an ambassador. Bea seems to fit right in at the beaux-arts Ninth Circuit headquarters on Seventh and Mission streets. His enormous office is decorated with paintings from his personal collection -- portraits and scenes painted in a classical style. Weathered antiques have been imported in a feeble attempt to fill the cavernous space. On the superior court, Bea required decorum in the courtroom. Some lawyers say he can come across as imperious.
    [Show full text]