DOCSLIB.ORG

Brett Kavanaugh

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brett Kavanaugh Brett Kavanaugh Brett Michael Kavanaugh (/ˈkævənɔː/; born February 12, 1965) is an American attorney and jurist who serves as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Brett Kavanaugh District of Columbia Circuit. Kavanaugh graduated from Yale College cum laude, with a degree in American history, where he was a member of the fraternity Delta Kappa Epsilon. After graduating from Yale Law School, Kavanaugh began his career as a law clerk and then a postgraduate fellow working under Judge Ken Starr. After Starr left the D.C. Circuit to take the position as head of the Office of Independent Counsel, Kavanaugh followed him to the OIC and assisted Starr with his various investigations concerning President Bill Clinton. Kavanaugh played a lead role in drafting the Starr Report, which urged the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. After the 2000 U.S. presidential election (in which Kavanaugh worked for the George W. Bush campaign in the Florida recount), Kavanaugh joined the administration as White House Staff Secretary and was a central figure in its efforts to identify and confirm judicial nominees.[2] Kavanaugh was first nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by President Bush in 2003. His confirmation hearings were contentious; they stalled for three years over charges of partisanship. Kavanaugh was ultimately confirmed to the D.C. Circuit in May 2006 after a series of negotiations between Democratic and Republican U.S. Senators.[3][4][5] An analysis covering the period 2003–2018 found that Kavanaugh had the most or second-most conservative voting record on the D.C. Court in every policy area.[6] To fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, President Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh on July 9, 2018, to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. During the confirmation process, Christine Blasey Ford came forward and, through interviews to the press and statements by her attorney, alleged that in the early 1980s Kavanaugh had attempted to rape her.[7][8][9] Kavanaugh "categorically and unequivocally" denied that the event occurred.[10][11] On September 23, Deborah Ramirez alleged sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh;[12] Kavanaugh denied this allegation as well.[13] On September 26, Julie Swetnick alleged that Mark Judge and Kavanaugh organized and participated in gang rape; Kavanaugh denied the allegations.[14] Judge of the United States Polling has shown that Kavanaugh has the lowest approval rating of any Supreme Court nominee in the modern era.[15][16][17][18][19] Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Incumbent Contents Assumed office May 30, 2006 Early life and education Appointed by George W. Early legal career (1990–2006) Bush U.S. Circuit Judge (2006–present) Notable cases Preceded by Laurence Abortion Silberman Affordable Care Act White House Staff Secretary Appointments Clause and separation of powers In office Environmental regulation June 6, 2003 – May 30, 2006 Extraterritorial jurisdiction President George W. First Amendment and free speech Bush Fourth Amendment and civil liberties National security Preceded by Harriet Miers Second Amendment and gun ownership Succeeded by Raul F. Yanes Law clerk hiring practices and controversy Personal details Nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States (2018) Born Brett Michael Legal philosophy and approach Kavanaugh Senate Judiciary Committee public hearing February 12, Sexual assault and rape allegations 1965 Christine Blasey Ford Washington, Deborah Ramirez D.C. Julie Swetnick Political Republican Teaching and scholarship party Personal life Spouse(s) Ashley Estes (m. 2004) Publications Children 2[1] See also Education Yale University References (BA, JD) Further reading External links Early life and education Kavanaugh was born on February 12, 1965, in Washington, D.C., the son of Martha Gamble (Murphy) and Everett Edward Kavanaugh Jr.[20][21] His mother was a history teacher at Woodson and McKinley high schools in Washington in the 1960s and 1970s. She earned her law degree from Washington College of Law in 1978 and served as a Maryland state Circuit Court Judge from 1995 to 2001.[22][23] His father was an attorney and served as the president of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association for two decades.[24] Kavanaugh was raised in Bethesda, Maryland. As a teenager he attended Georgetown Preparatory School, a Catholic all-boys high school, where he was two years senior to future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.[25][26] At Georgetown Prep, he was captain of the school's basketball team and played as a wide receiver and cornerback for the school's football team.[27] He graduated in 1983.[28] Kavanaugh was friends with classmate Mark Judge; both were in the same class with Maryland State Senate member Richard Madaleno.[29][30][31][32] After prep school, Kavanaugh went to Yale University and majored in history.[33] Several of Kavanaugh's Yale classmates remembered him as a "serious, but not showy student" who loved sports, especially basketball.[33] He unsuccessfully tried out for the Yale Bulldogs men's basketball team, and later played for two years on the university's junior varsity team instead.[33] He also wrote articles about basketball and other sports for the Yale Daily News,[33] and was a member of the fraternity Delta Kappa Epsilon.[34] Kavanaugh graduated from Yale in 1987 with a Bachelor of Arts cum laude.[33] Kavanaugh remained at Yale to attend Yale Law School. During law school he lived in a dilapidated group house with future judge James E. Boasberg and became a basketball partner of Kavanaugh as a student at Yale Professor George L. Priest, who was the sponsor of the school's Federalist Society.[35] Kavanaugh served as a Notes Editor for the Yale Law Journal, and graduated with a Juris Doctor in 1990.[36] Early legal career (1990–2006) Kavanaugh first worked as a law clerk for Judge Walter King Stapleton of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.[35] During Kavanaugh's clerkship, Stapleton wrote the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which the Third Circuit upheld many of Pennsylvania's abortion restrictions.[35] Priest recommended Kavanaugh to Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, who was regarded as a feeder judge.[35] After clerking for Kozinski, Kavanaugh next interviewed for a clerkship with Chief Justice William Rehnquist on the U.S. Supreme Court, but was not offered a clerkship.[35] Kavanaugh then earned a one-year fellowship with the Solicitor General of the United States, Ken Starr.[37] Kavanaugh next clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, working alongside his high school classmate Neil Gorsuch and with future-Judge Gary Feinerman.[25] After his Supreme Court clerkship, Kavanaugh worked for Ken Starr again as an Associate Counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel, Brett Kavanaugh while working [38] where his colleagues included Rod Rosenstein and Alex Azar. In that capacity, he handled a number of the novel constitutional and legal for the Independent Counsel in issues presented during the investigation of the death of Vincent Foster.[38][39][40] Though Starr's investigation concluded that Foster had the 1990s indeed committed suicide, Kavanaugh has been criticized for investing federal money and other resources into investigating partisan conspiracy theories surrounding the cause of Foster's death.[41][42] In 1997 to 1998,Kavanaugh was a partner at the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis. In 1998 he rejoined Starr as an Associate Counselor.[43] In Swidler & Berlin v. United States (1998), Kavanaugh argued his first and only case before the Supreme Court. Arguing for Starr's office, Kavanaugh he asked the court to disregard attorney–client privilege in relation to the investigation of Kavanaugh with President Foster's death.[44] The court rejected Kavanaugh's arguments by a vote of 6–3.[45] George W. Bush and other White House staffers in 2001. Kavanaugh was a principal author of the Starr Report to Congress, released in September 1998, on the Monica Lewinsky–Bill Clinton sex scandal; the report called for the impeachment of Kavanaugh is seated directly to President Clinton.[38] Kavanaugh had urged Starr to ask the president sexually graphic questions and argued on broad grounds for the impeachment of Bill Clinton,[46][47] describing the left of Bush. Clinton as being involved in "a conspiracy to obstruct justice", having "disgraced his office" and "lied to the American people".[48] The report provided extensive and explicit descriptions of each of the President's sexual encounters with Monica Lewinsky, a level of detail which the authors described as "essential" to the case against Clinton.[49][50] In 1999, Kavanaugh rejoined the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis, as a partner.[43][37] While there in 2000, he was pro bono counsel of record for relatives of Elián González, a six-year-old rescued Cuban boy. After the boy's mother's death at sea, relatives in the U.S. wanted to keep him from returning to the care of his sole surviving parent, his father in Cuba. Kavanaugh was among a series of lawyers who unsuccessfully sought to stop efforts to repatriate Gonzalez to Cuba.[51] The district court, the Circuit Court and the Supreme Court all followed precedent, refusing to block the boy's return to his home.[52] While at Kikland & Ellis, Kavanaugh authored two amicus briefs to the Supreme Court, supporting religious activities and expressions in public places.[52] The first, in 2000, in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, argued that a student speaker at football games voted for by a majority of students should be treated as private speech in a limited public forum; the second, in Good News Club v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Truthiness and the Marble Palace
    Emory Law Scholarly Commons Emory Law Journal Online Journals 2016 Truthiness and the Marble Palace Chad M. Oldfather Todd C. Peppers Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj-online Recommended Citation Chad M. Oldfather & Todd C. Peppers, Truthiness and the Marble Palace, 65 Emory L. J. Online 2001 (2016). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj-online/17 This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Emory Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Emory Law Journal Online by an authorized administrator of Emory Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OLDFATHER_PEPPERS GALLEYSFINAL 1/13/2016 10:12 AM TRUTHINESS AND THE MARBLE PALACE Chad M. Oldfather* Todd C. Peppers** INTRODUCTION Tucked inside the title page of David Lat’s Supreme Ambitions, just after a note giving credit for the cover design and before the copyright notice, sits a standard disclaimer of the sort that appears in all novels: “This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and events either are the products of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, events or locales is entirely coincidental.”1 These may be the most truly fictional words in the entire book. Its judicial characters are recognizable as versions of real judges, including, among others, Alex Kozinski, Goodwin Liu, Stephen Reinhardt, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas. Real-life bloggers including Tom Goldstein and Howard Bashman appear as themselves,2 and a blog called Beneath Their Robes, a clear reference to the blog that was Lat’s initial claim to fame3 (this time run by one of the protagonist’s bitter rivals) play a pivotal role in the plot.4 Supreme Ambitions’ observations about judging, clerking, prestige and the culture of elite law schools likewise reflect core truths, albeit via storylines and characters that are often exaggerated almost to the point of caricature.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Clerkship Handbook 2013
    Career Services Office | CLERKSHIPS JUDICIAL CLERKSHIP HANDBOOK 2013 - 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview of the Clerkship Program 2 Should I Seek a Clerkship? 3 Where Should I Apply to Clerk? 4 Type of Court 5 State Courts 5 Federal Courts 6 Federal District Court 7 Federal Appellate Court 7 Clerkships with Specialized Courts 8 Bankruptcy Courts 8 U.S. Magistrate Judges 8 U.S. Claims Court 9 U.S. Tax Court 9 Federal Circuit 9 U.S. Court of International Trade 9 U.S. Supreme Court 10 How Do I Apply for Clerkships? 11 Clerkship Application Materials 12 Cover Letter and Resume 13 Transcripts 14 Writing Sample 15 Letters of Recommendation 16 Envelopes and Labels 17 Step-by-Step Instructions 18 Clerkship Interviews, Offers and Acceptances 22 APPENDICES Appendix A: Timeline and Checklist Appendix B: USC Law School Graduates & Students with Clerkships Appendix C: USC Faculty Who Clerked Appendix D: California State Court Hiring Practices Appendix E: Optional Recommender Questionnaire Appendix F: Resources for Researching Judges and Courts Appendix G: Loan Repayment Assistance Program Appendix H: Supplemental Readings Appendix I: Sample Cover Letters Appendix J: Form of Address Appendix K: Mail-Merge Instructions Table of Contents OVERVIEW OF THE CLERKSHIP PROGRAM A judicial clerkship can be a very rewarding work experience for a recent law graduate, and it is a great way to begin your legal career in almost any area of practice. The Law School and the Clerkship Committee strongly support our students’ efforts to apply for judicial clerkships through several means, including the following: ASSIGNING YOU A CLERKSHIP ADVISOR If you participate in the Clerkship Program, we will assign a member of the Clerkship Committee or the Career Services Office to be your advisor throughout the application process.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Genealogy (And Mythology) of John Roberts: Clerkships from Gray to Brandeis to Friendly to Roberts
    The Judicial Genealogy (and Mythology) of John Roberts: Clerkships from Gray to Brandeis to Friendly to Roberts BRAD SNYDER* During his Supreme Court nomination hearings, John Roberts idealized and mythologized the first judge he clerkedfor, Second Circuit Judge Henry Friendly, as the sophisticated judge-as-umpire. Thus far on the Court, Roberts has found it difficult to live up to his Friendly ideal, particularlyin several high-profile cases. This Article addresses the influence of Friendly on Roberts and judges on law clerks by examining the roots of Roberts's distinguishedyet unrecognized lineage of former clerks: Louis Brandeis 's clerkship with Horace Gray, Friendly's clerkship with Brandeis, and Roberts's clerkships with Friendly and Rehnquist. Labeling this lineage a judicial genealogy, this Article reorients clerkship scholarship away from clerks' influences on judges to judges' influences on clerks. It also shows how Brandeis, Friendly, and Roberts were influenced by their clerkship experiences and how they idealized their judges. By laying the clerkship experiences and career paths of Brandeis, Friendly, and Roberts side-by- side in detailed primary source accounts, this Article argues that judicial influence on clerks is more professional than ideological and that the idealization ofjudges and emergence of clerks hips as must-have credentials contribute to a culture ofjudicial supremacy. * Assistant Professor, University of Wisconsin Law School. Thanks to Eleanor Brown, Dan Ernst, David Fontana, Abbe Gluck, Dirk Hartog, Dan
    [Show full text]
  • The Love Song of J. Anthony Kennedy
    THE LOVE SONG OF J. ANTHONY KENNEDY Steven M. Klepper† HE JUNE 2015 MARRIAGE equality decision in Obergefell v. Hodges1 fell during the same month as the 100th anniversary of the pub- lication of T.S. Eliot’s The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. There has been a great recent debate over the value of a liberal arts Tdegree. I graduated from Goucher College, and I can tell you that a liberal arts degree can lead to spending your leisure time doing things like writing a Prufrock spoof from the perspective of a sitting justice. Whether that helps or hurts the cause, I do not know. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment.2 • • • † Steven Klepper is a principal at Kramon & Graham, P.A. and editor-in-chief of the Maryland Appellate Blog. 1 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015). 2 Eliot began Prufrock with a quote (in Italian) from THE INFERNO. I’ll begin with a quote from Alexander Hamilton, writing as “Publius” in THE FEDERALIST NO. 78. The reason for these footnotes is that I suspect most or all of this piece will become hopelessly dated in the next ten years, and I wish to be able to inform the future reader and my future self what I was thinking. 19 GREEN BAG 2D 101 Steven M.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Review Essay the Supreme Court's Gatekeepers: the Role of Law Clerks in the Certiorari Process
    Book Review Essay The Supreme Court’s Gatekeepers: The Role of Law Clerks in the Certiorari Process COURTIERS OF THE MARBLE PALACE: THE RISE AND INFLUENCE OF THE SUPREME COURT LAW CLERK. By Todd C. Peppers.† Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006. Pp. 310. $21.95. SORCERERS’ APPRENTICES: 100 YEARS OF LAW CLERKS AT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. By Artemus Ward‡ & David L. Weiden.‡‡ New York: New York University Press, 2006. Pp. 336. $39.00. Reviewed by David R. Stras* Despite the shroud of secrecy surrounding the Supreme Court, it has become common knowledge that, to varying degrees, the Justices no longer tackle their work alone. Chief Justice Rehnquist, for instance, discussed the role of law clerks publicly, including describing the “cert pool,” in which many of the Justices combine their law clerks to draft memoranda analyzing each of the petitions for review under the Court’s discretionary jurisdiction.1 Other accounts, such as Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong’s book The Brethren and Ed Lazarus’s book Closed Chambers, go a step further by suggesting that law clerks inappropriately influence their Justices and occa- 2 sionally impose their policy preferences on them. † Assistant Professor, Department of Public Affairs, Roanoke College. ‡ Assistant Professor of Political Science, Northern Illinois University. ‡‡ Assistant Professor of Politics and Government, Illinois State University. * Associate Professor, University of Minnesota Law School. I would like to thank Peggy Cordray, Rich Cordray, Allan Erbsen, Michael Gerhardt, Arthur Hellman, Toby Heytens, Kristin Hickman, Timothy Johnson, Orin Kerr, Trevor Morrison, and John Neiman for their comments and suggestions on an earlier draft.
    [Show full text]
  • How Law Clerks Influence
    HOW LAW CLERKS INFLUENCE: INFORMATION AT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT by CHRISTOPHER DAVID KROMPHARDT JOSEPH L. SMITH, COMMITTEE CHAIR STEPHEN BORRELLI RICHARD C. FORDING EMILY H. RITTER CHRISTOPHER ZORN A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2015 Copyright Christopher David Kromphardt 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT The role of law clerks at the United States Supreme Court has long been a source of curiosity among observers and scholars alike. Of particular interest are what characteristics determine which applicants are selected to clerk and what influence clerks have on the justices’ decision making. Using a two-part framework that identifies information asymmetries, where clerks possess relevant information that they can transmit to their justices, and conditions under which this information leads a justice to learn about policies’ impact, I uncover evidence of a causal mechanism by which clerks wield systematic influence over the justices’ decision making. I show that information clerks convey that is derived from their ideological preferences and from their experiences and socialization influences their justices’ votes on the merits. In the concluding chapter, I argue that these findings shed light on the broader class of principal-agent relationships of which the justice-clerk dynamic is an example and discuss how law clerks pose an opportunity for scholars to learn how principals acquire and use information from their advisors. ii DEDICATION To Bud Fischer and Bonnie Irwin, who made graduate school sound like a good idea.
    [Show full text]
  • Judging the Judges
    CROSS & LINDQUIST IN FINAL.DOC 5/5/2009 4:04:41 PM JUDGING THE JUDGES FRANK B. CROSS† STEFANIE LINDQUIST†† ABSTRACT The evaluation of judges, especially circuit court judges, has commanded increased attention, with the quantitative analyses of Stephen Choi and Mitu Gulati. However, the proper dimensions for the evaluation of judges remains much disputed. Critics have challenged Choi & Gulati’s scales for measuring judicial quality but have offered little that is positive that would improve measurement. The critics make philosophical challenges to whether the measures truly capture the qualities of judging we should desire, but they offer no measurement tools to improve on Choi and Gulati. We hope to advance the theoretical and empirical evaluation by incorporating different scales for evaluating judges. We consider Choi & Gulati’s data, plus the record of each judge’s opinions on review at the Supreme Court and other more subjective measures of judicial quality. We then employ a cluster analysis to differentiate among different types of judges on all these dimensions. This analysis does not provide a rating of the “best” judges, because the standards for “best” judging are contested. Some judges may be considered best, because their opinions receive more citations. However, these very judges may be considered less than best, because they render unnecessarily expansive decisions that yield more citations. Some argue for judges with minimalist decisionmaking characteristics that tend to result in fewer citations. Our cluster analysis simply categorizes circuit court judges into groups with like decisionmaking Copyright © 2009 by Frank B. Cross and Stefanie Lindquist. † Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law, McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin; Professor of Law, University of Texas Law School; Professor of Government, University of Texas at Austin.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 115 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 115 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 163 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 2017 No. 58—Part III Senate (Legislative day of Tuesday, April 4, 2017) The Senate met at 10 a.m., on the ex- U.S. SENATE, a much larger story, another extreme piration of the recess, and was called to PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, escalation in the left’s never-ending order by the Honorable LUTHER Washington, DC, April 6, 2017. drive to politicize the courts and the To the Senate: STRANGE, a Senator from the State of Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, confirmation process. Alabama. of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby It is a fight they have waged for dec- appoint the Honorable LUTHER STRANGE, a ades with a singular aim: securing raw f Senator from the State of Alabama, to per- power, no matter the cost to country form the duties of the Chair. or institution. It underlies why this PRAYER ORRIN G. HATCH, threatening filibuster cannot be al- The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- President pro tempore. lowed to succeed or continue—for the fered the following prayer: Mr. STRANGE thereupon assumed sake of the Senate, for the sake of the Let us pray. the Chair as Acting President pro tem- Court, and for the sake of our country. O God, our help in ages past, our hope pore. I think a look back through history for years to come, throughout life’s f will help every colleague understand seasons moments of decision arrive.
    [Show full text]
  • A Market-Based Solution to the Judicial Clerkship Selection Process
    Scholarship Repository University of Minnesota Law School Articles Faculty Scholarship 2000 A Market-Based Solution to the Judicial Clerkship Selection Process Edward S. Adams University of Minnesota Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Edward S. Adams, A Market-Based Solution to the Judicial Clerkship Selection Process, 59 MD. L. REV. 129 (2000), available at https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles/92. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in the Faculty Scholarship collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A MARKET-BASED SOLUTION TO THE JUDICIAL CLERKSHIP SELECTION PROCESS EDWARD S. ADAMS* Judges universally agree that the close relationship between aju- dicial clerk and a judge is one unlike that between typical employers and employees.' A judge depends almost totally on the aid of law clerks for her work product; they are sounding boards for legal opin- ions as well as confidants.' Unfortunately, former judicial law clerks have recently exploited this dependency by publishing "tell-all books" about their experiences.' This problem may cause judges to be even * Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Julius E. Davis Chair and Professor of Law, and Co-Director of the Center for Business Law and Entrepreneurship, University of Min- nesota. B.A., Knox College;J.D., University of Chicago; M.B.A., Carlson School of Manage- ment, University of Minnesota.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bureaucratic Court
    Michigan Law Review Volume 105 Issue 6 2007 The Bureaucratic Court Benjamin C. Mizer Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Legal Profession Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Benjamin C. Mizer, The Bureaucratic Court, 105 MICH. L. REV. 1301 (2007). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol105/iss6/18 This Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE BUREAUCRATIC COURT Benjamin C. Mizer* COURTIERS OF THE MARBLE PALACE: THE RISE AND INFLUENCE OF THE SUPREME COURT LAW CLERK. By Todd C. Peppers. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 2006. Pp. xvi, 310. Cloth, $55; paper, $21.95. SORCERERS' APPRENTICES: 100 YEARS OF LAW CLERKS AT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. By Artemus Ward and David L. Weiden. New York and London: New York University Press. 2006. Pp. xiv, 337. $39. INTRODUCTION In August 2006, the New York Times caused a stir by reporting that the number of female law clerks at the United States Supreme Court has fallen sharply in the first full Term in which Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is no longer on the bench.' In an era in which nearly fifty percent of all law school graduates are women, the Times reported, less than twenty percent of the clerks in the Court's 2006 Term-seven of thirty-seven-are women.
    [Show full text]
  • A Podcast of One's
    Michigan Journal of Gender & Law Volume 28 Issue 1 2021 A Podcast of One’s Own Leah M. Litman University of Michigan Law School, [email protected] Melissa Murray New York University, School of Law Katherine Shaw Cardozo Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl Part of the Law and Gender Commons, Law and Race Commons, Legal Profession Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Leah M. Litman, Melissa Murray & Katherine Shaw, A Podcast of One’s Own, 28 MICH. J. GENDER & L. 51 (2021). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol28/iss1/3 https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.28.1.podcast This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of Gender & Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A PODCAST OF ONE’S OWN eah . itman, elissa urray & atherine haw* Abstract In this short Essay, we discuss the lack of racial and gender diver- sity on and around the Supreme Court. As we note, the ranks of the Court’s Justices and its clerks historically have been dominat- ed by white men. But this homogeneity is not limited to the Court’s members or its clerks. As we explain, much of the Court’s broader ecosystem suffers from this same lack of diversity. The advocates who argue before the Court are primarily white men; the experts cited in the Court’s opinions, as well as the experts on whom Court commentators rely in interpreting those opinions, are often white men; and the commentators who translate the Court’s work for the public are also largely white men.
    [Show full text]
  • Heinonline (PDF)
    +(,121/,1( Citation: 101 Va. L. Rev. 231 2015 Provided by: University of Virginia Law Library Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Mon Jul 11 15:55:19 2016 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: https://www.copyright.com/ccc/basicSearch.do? &operation=go&searchType=0 &lastSearch=simple&all=on&titleOrStdNo=0042-6601 VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 101 APRIL 2015 NUMBER2 ARTICLES THE CHANGING FACE OF THE SUPREME COURT A. E. Dick Howard* INTRODUCTION .............................................. 233 1. THE JUSTICES ........................................... 235 A. Race and Ethnicity. ............................ 235 1. Desegregatingthe Court: Thurgood Marshall ................. 236 2. A Diferent Black Voice: Clarence Thomas..... ..... 238 3. A Latina Justice: Sonia Sotomayor ......... ...... 240 4. Evaluating the Impact ofRace and Ethnicity: Substance and Symbol .................................... 241 B. Gender .............................. ...... 242 1. Breaking the Barrier:Sandra Day O'Connor .................. 243 2. Gender Equality Comes to the Court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg. ................................ 244 3. Evaluating the Impact of Gender: Gender and Judging ............................ ..... 246 C. Religion............
    [Show full text]