Protecting Fair and Impartial Courts Reflections on Judicial Independence

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Protecting Fair and Impartial Courts Reflections on Judicial Independence 58 Vol. 104 No. 2 What is an idependent judiciary? By David F. Levi Protecting Fair and Impartial Courts AN ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE RENDELL CENTER Reflections on Judicial Independence SYMPOSIUM ON JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE (PHILADELPHIA, OCTOBER 2019) BY DAVID F. LEVI ABOVE: A ROAD SIGN IN DECATUR, ILL., DEMANDS THE IMPEACHMENT OF U.S. CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN, WHO SUPPORTED DESEGREGATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS (JUNE 25, 1963; ASSOCIATED PRESS). SYMPOSIUM PHOTOS ON FOLLOWING PAGES BY SAMEER A. KAHN, PROVIDED BY THE RENDELL CENTER. Judicature 59 I speak today about the number and sometimes per- importance of fair and sonal consequences — the impartial courts and the role public’s experience of the of judicial independence in Supreme Court and the entire achieving that goal. I begin federal court system. with two stories. Some years ago, I acknowledge that the my wife, Nancy, and I took a river kay- Court is important to this aking course on the American River in discussion because of its lead- David F. Levi Sacramento. The course turned out to ership role, because of the DIRECTOR, BOLCH JUDICIAL INSTITUTE AND be nothing short of terrifying, and I enduring salience of certain PRESIDENT, AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE have tried to forget most of that expe- questions that appear on the rience, especially the part where the Court’s docket, and because it is easy to judges so arrayed, the experience would novice kayaker hangs upside down forget that the Supreme Court is unique destroy both the reality and the appear- about to drown or sustain a concus- in many ways and is not characteristic ance of fair, impartial, nonpartisan sion. But I did learn one thing that I of most judging in this country. courts. The reality and the appearance have remembered to this day: If there Here is my second story. I had a are in a constant feedback loop, and we is a large boulder that you must avoid, debate with Judge Richard Posner a few need to consider both in any discussion never look at it. If you do, your body years ago at Northwestern Law School. of independent and fair courts. will turn and you will collide with the I had reviewed his book How Judges Here is how I have organized my very thing you wish to avoid. Think somewhat critically. At the end talk: I begin by addressing why fair and In this conversation, there is one of our debate, he turned to me and impartial courts are important. I look boulder I particularly wish to avoid, at asked: “Does Dean Levi seriously think back at the Framers and distill certain least as we begin our trip down river: that it would make any difference if postulates about what makes for fair That boulder, if you will, is the United Republican-appointed judges wore red and impartial courts. (Spoiler alert: the States Supreme Court. If we even start robes and Democratic-appointed Framers were right.) I then explore to discuss the Court, the justices, and judges wore blue robes?” I said: “It three related topics that bear on the the confirmation process, it will attract would make a huge difference. And discussion: judicial discretion and judg- all or most of our attention and we may it would be terrible.” He responded: ment, the assertion that judges are no flip or at least lose the possibility of a “That just doesn’t cut it.” better than politicians in black robes, larger view. After all, the Court decides He got the last word, but I don’t think and the complexity added to the dis- fewer than 75 cases a year out of the he was right. Judge Posner was probably cussion of judicial decision-making nearly 360,000 federal criminal and thinking of the Supreme Court, possibly by judicial analytics and legal realism. civil cases, and nearly half of the Court’s of the federal appellate courts; I think I then turn to three threats to judicial cases are decided unani- his point may have been independence and to fair and impartial mously or nearly so and IF JUDGES WERE TO that everyone already judging. Each of these threats is mainly with little controversy. CONSIDER OR PRESENT knows the party of the to the independence of our state courts And, if we consider that THEMSELVES AS OF president who appointed and state judges. Each of these threats more than 100 million DIFFERENT POLITICAL the judge, so the color of runs directly counter to the vision of cases are filed in the state TEAMS BY WEARING THE the robe would not add the Framers as they structured the courts each year, a differ- TEAM’S JERSEYS, AND IF any information or have federal courts. ent focus for our inquiry PARTIES AND LAWYERS any additional effect. My starts to take shape. This WERE TO SEE JUDGES SO point was that if judges Why are fair and impartial courts is a staggering number ARRAYED, the EXPERIENCE were to consider or pres- and judges important? of interactions between WOULD DESTROY BOTH ent themselves as of Why are fair and impartial courts our fellow Americans THE REALITY and the different political teams important? And how does judicial and their judges and APPEARANCE OF FAIR, by wearing the team’s independence preserve fairness and court systems, inter- IMPARTIAL, NONPARTISAN jerseys, and if parties impartiality in our courts?” Perhaps the actions that dwarf — in COURTS. and lawyers were to see questions are too obvious. If you are an u 60 Vol. 104 No. 2 IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL DEMOCRACY WITHOUT A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL originalist, the answers JUDICIARY, and IT IS Nor were they auton- personal will and preference on the are easy. The Framers NOT POSSIBLE TO HAVE omous. They were other. He saw the importance of cou- and the ratifiers con- A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL confined by law and by rageous judges to the preservation of sidered that a fair and JUDICIARY THAT LACKS the assent of the other individual liberty and to the ameliora- impartial judiciary — one INDEPENDENCE IN BOTH branches. Moreover, tion of oppressive legislation. Judges in that followed the law and of its ASPECTS. for much of their activ- this Republic, protected by life tenure, was not biased, parti- ity, they would be would unite integrity and fortitude to san, intimidated, or seeking preferment sharing the judicial power with citi- wisdom and knowledge of the law. And — was central to a republican form of zens through the jury trial, which has this knowledge of and fealty to the government. They believed that judicial such a prominent place in the Bill of law, gained through practice and study, independence was critical to fairness Rights and our traditions. would be the bulwark against judicial and impartiality. They thought of judi- Federalist 78 celebrated the separa- overreaching. cial independence in its two facets: the tion of powers and the independent Even if the authority of the found- decisional independence of the judge judiciary in often quoted language. ing generation were not enough, it from outside pressures or inducements Alexander Hamilton famously said: seems that, in fact and over time, their when deciding a case, and the indepen- “The judiciary . has no influence beliefs have proven themselves: Indeed, dence of the judicial branch as a whole, over either the sword or the purse; no it is not possible to have a successful as a separate branch of three. direction either of the strength or of democracy without a fair and impartial The Declaration of Independence the wealth of the society; and can take judiciary, and it is not possible to have prominently featured King George no active resolution whatever. It may a fair and impartial judiciary that lacks III’s attacks on both the judicial branch truly be said to have neither FORCE nor independence in both of its aspects. Are and the individual judge in its bill of WILL, but merely judgment; and must there examples of successful democ- particulars: “He has obstructed the ultimately depend upon the aid of the racies where the judicial function is Administration of Justice by refusing executive arm even for the efficacy of dependent or subsumed in the other his Assent to Laws for establishing its judgments.” And, he said: “[A]s lib- branches such that the judicial branch Judiciary Powers.” And: “He has made erty can have nothing to fear from the lacks institutional independence? Are Judges dependent on his Will alone judiciary alone, [it] would have every there successful democracies where for the tenure of their offices, and the thing to fear from its union with either the judges lack decisional independence amount and payment of their sala- of the other departments” — which but are routinely subject to pressure or ries.” The founders were steeped in is why separation and independence external command or inducement? The Montesquieu and other thinkers of the were so important. answer is “no.” late 17th and early 18th century, and Hamilton’s comments speak to us Americans need to have faith in the they came to believe that a “fair and even now. Judges should not by party independence, fairness, and impartial- impartial” judiciary was only possible or for any other reason be united to ity of our judges because they look to were it embodied in a separate judicial the other branches. Nor should they our courts as the place where they can branch and were the judges protected be involved on their own initiative get a fair shake whether their complaint in their tenure and compensation. and authority in the redirection of is with the government or a business or Article III of the Constitution reflects the wealth of the society.
Recommended publications
  • Keeping Faith with the Constitution in Changing Times
    Vanderbilt Law School Program in Constitutional Law & Theory and The American Constitution Society Present KEEPING FAITH WITH THE CONSTITUTION IN CHANGING TIMES October 6-7, 2006 Flynn Auditorium Vanderbilt Law School What does it mean to be faithful to the meaning of the Constitution? Can progressive approaches to constitutional interpretation persuasively lay claim to principle, fidelity, adherence to the rule of law and democratic legitimacy? How can these approaches be effectively communicated and made part of the public debate about the Constitution? A diverse group of scholars, lawyers, journalists and judges will address different aspects of this inquiry over two days of panel discussions and roundtable conversations during “Keeping Faith with the Constitution in Changing Times,” a conference sponsored jointly by Vanderbilt Law School’s Program in Constitutional Law & Theory and the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. CONFERENCE SCHEDULE Friday, October 6 8:45-9:15 Continental Breakfast in North Lobby 9:15-9:45 Opening Remarks Dean Ed Rubin, Vanderbilt Law School Lisa Brown, Executive Director, ACS 9:45-10:30 Origins of the Debate over Originalism and the Living Constitution (Christopher Yoo, Moderator) Barry Friedman Howard Gillman 10:30-10:45 Break 10:45-12:15 Constitutional Fidelity Over Time (Ed Rubin, Moderator) Erwin Chemerinsky Marty Lederman John McGinnis 12:15-1:30 Lunch North Lobby 1:30-3:00 The Varieties of Historical Argument (Deborah Hellman, Moderator) Peggy Cooper Davis Robert Gordon Richard Primus
    [Show full text]
  • Counterbalance
    national association of women judges counterbalance Volume 29 Issue 4 INSIDE THIS ISSUE Fourth Annual Meeting with Congressional Women's Caucus / 1 President’s Message / 2 Executive Director’s Message / 3 Memphis NAWJ Annual Conference / 5 Intimate Partner Violence and its Diversion from Courts / 8 District News / 12 International News / 19 Women in Prison / 22 Infi nity Project / 25 (L-R) NAWJ President La Tia W. Martin, Ambassador for Global Women's Issues Melanne Verveer, and Hon. Marjory D. Fields (Retired) Summer Academy / 26 Scholarships / 27 Fourth Annual Meeting of Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues Atlanta Retrospective / 28 National Women Leaders of the Judiciary—A Wonderful Success!!! Further A’Field / 30 On the morning of July 15, 2009 NAWJ Presi- our political system are open and ready to continue dent La Tia W. Martin and Meeting Chair Judge the advancement of women. Juanita Bing Newton, Dean of the New York State Christina M. Tchen, Director of the White Judicial Institute, together with Rep. Janice Scha- House Offi ce of Public Engagement and Executive kowsky of Illinois and Rep. Mary Fallin of Okla- Director of the newly created White House Coun- homa, Co-Chairs of the 111th Congress’ Caucus cil of Women and Girls, offered a spirited charge for Women’s Issues, hosted a revelatory exchange to continue the pursuit of equality and justice for on pressing international and domestic challenges women. She also advised that the administration of for women and girls in the world today. Nearly President Barack Obama was interested in seeking 60 judges, representatives, lawyers, government outstanding women and minority candidates for offi cials and bipartisan congressional staff were various positions.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAG SAMEACH! SHINING CAREER Veteran Yiddish Actor Allen Lewis Rickman Performs in the Sunshine Boys
    1 CHAG SAMEACH! SHINING CAREER Veteran Yiddish actor Allen Lewis Rickman performs in The Sunshine Boys. MARCH 14, 2019 / 7 ADAR II, 5779 PAGE 22 JEWISHEXPONENT.COM — WHAT IT MEANS TO BE JEWISH IN PHILADELPHIA — $1.00 OF NOTE Anti-Semitic LOCAL Remarks Barrack Teachers Union Update From Imam Union still seek- ing dialogue with Create Uproar school board. JESSE BERNSTEIN | JE STAFF Page 4 LOCAL THE ALAQSA ISLAMIC Society on Germantown Avenue has come under Israeli Film Fest re in recent days aer video emerged Starts March 16 of a guest speaker, Imam Abdelmohsen Films address Abouhatab, making numerous anti- controversial issues. Semitic comments to a crowded sanctuary Page 5 in visits to the mosque between November and February. A student speaks before U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Marjorie Rendell. Jesse Bernstein FAKE NEWS Abouhatab described Jews as “the News You vilest” people, and said that powerful Jewish media gures have conspired to Can’t Use portray Muslims as “oppressive and pred- Goldilocks on Trial: In honor of Purim, atory lions” in the mainstream Western we showcase our media, among other comments. Students Practice Civic silly side. “e Jews are the vilest people in Page 12 terms of their moral values, their nature and their violation of agreements, but Engagement when they lived near Arabs, they adopted some of their moral values and customs,” JESSE BERNSTEIN | JE STAFF of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, high above Volume 239000 Abouhatab said. the city of Philadelphia. Number 480 e videos were obtained, translated ON THE 19TH oor of the James A.
    [Show full text]
  • Fostering Balance on the Federal Courts Carl W
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Richmond University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Law Faculty Publications School of Law 1998 Fostering Balance on the Federal Courts Carl W. Tobias University of Richmond, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/law-faculty-publications Part of the Courts Commons Recommended Citation Carl Tobias, Fostering Balance on the Federal Courts, 47 Am. U. L. Rev. 935 (1998) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ESSAY FOSTERING BALANCE ON THE FEDERAL COURTS CARL TOBIAS* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ........................................................................................ 935 I. Choosing Federal Judges in President Clinton's First Term .. 937 A. Selection During the First Year ......................................... 937 B. Selection During the Second Year .................................... 943 C. Selection During the Third Year ...................................... 946 D. Selection During the Fourth Year..................................... 949 E. Summary of the First Term ............................................... 950 II. Choosing Federal Judges in the First Year of the Second Term .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dialogue on Diversity 5 CLE Credits N by Jeff Lyons Available At
    Philadelphia ® The Monthly Newspaper of the Philadelphia Bar Association Vol. 38, No. 10 October 2009 13 Courses, Dialogue on Diversity 5 CLE Credits n By Jeff Lyons Available at A panel of 12 attorneys and judges Bench-Bar discussed the past, present and future of diversity and inclusion in the legal More than 400 attorneys and judges profession at the Association’s Sept. 22 are expected to attend the Association’s Dialogue on Diversity. 2009 Bench-Bar and Annual Conference Chancellor Sayde Ladov moderated at Harrah’s Atlantic City on Oct. 23 and the program and said the summit is 24, where five CLE credits and 13 differ- evidence of the Philadelphia Bar Associa- ent seminars will be available. tion’s continuing commitment to make The Conference kicks off with the this 13,000-member bar an inclusive, October Quarterly Meeting on Oct. 23 welcoming place for all lawyers. with a discussion on the future of Philadel- “We want to help the legal community phia in challenging economic times. The in Philadelphia recognize and maintain presiding judges of the state’s courts will and continue to explore its commitment also present a state of the courts discussion. to diversity. As times change, we must Programs will be available in a number of remain steadfast in our commitment. But different practice areas. the way in which we move the dialogue Join your colleagues, friends and mem- on diversity further must be geared to the bers of the bench for a weekend of educa- realities of the day,” she said. tion, camaraderie and fun that includes Panelists included U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission to the Courthouse: Does Civil Rights Litigation Remediate Racial Inequality in the Workplace?
    From the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission to the Courthouse: Does Civil Rights Litigation Remediate Racial Inequality in the Workplace? By David Berney ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the ability of civil rights litigation to redress racial inequality in the workplace. It enters the larger historical debate regarding the effectiveness of civil rights litigation to serve as a force for progressive, socio- political change. To focus my inquiry, I studied the operations of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, an administrative agency charged with enforcing civil rights laws. I also interviewed major participants in the civil rights litigation system, including complainants, attorneys, and judges. I drew upon my own experiences as a practicing civil rights attorney. My investigation employed a range of different methods, including interviews, ethnographic observation, and archival research. This is, to my knowledge, the first full study of the actual operations of an important state civil rights agency in close to fifty years. My dissertation finds that litigation has historically promoted racial equality in employment. But two factors have contributed to limit what lawsuits can realistically accomplish today. First, starting in the 1970s, Republican presidential administrations appointed judges who proved less sympathetic to civil rights claims. The resulting case law made it much harder to bring successful lawsuits. Second, expressions of workplace bias became much more covert over time partly as a consequence of the successes that civil rights litigators achieved. The litigation paradigm is not well designed to tackle such subtleties. Beyond a lack of effectiveness, litigation can also have deleterious effects as it can cause employees to suffer psychic injury on top of whatever racial indignities they have endured.
    [Show full text]
  • Previously Released Merrick Garland Docs
    OATH OF OFFICE FOR UNITED STATES JUDGES (ritlc 28, Sec. 453 and Title 5. Sec. 3331. Unltr.d St.aleS Code) Merrick B. Garland I, ...... ............. .. .............. ....... .......... , do solemnly swear (or affinn) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perfonn all the duties . United States Circuit Judge . incumbent upon me as . under the Consucuuon and laws of the United States: and that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic: that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same: that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion: and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So HELP ME Goo. ... ..... u ~~- UL ... .·------_ Subscribed and swo ~ to (or affinned) before me this ....... Al.I. R '.T ~f.. ..... ... ... day of .. 4,pJ? .; ) .. ..................... 19 f.7 . -~ - ~~dL~-~~i ··· .. ..... Actual abode .... .. .< .~'- ~ { :- ~ 11J .~ ...... ..... ... Official station* ........... ...... Date of binh ... · · ·~?:- ... I~<?!~ Exemption 6 I Date of entry on duty .. ... ........ "'Titk lll S<?c. -1~6 u nited St.ate~ Code. as amended. v .o. \.JI·~ Of r"9'110tW'191 Menagemef'W FPM CMplllr IZle et-toe APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS United States Circuit Judge March 20, 1997 (POfition to wlticl appoif!Ud) (Dau o/ appoin~ U. S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC (BuNau or Divilion) (Plau of tmp~t) Merrick B. Garland I, ----------------------• do solemnly swear (or affirm) that- A.
    [Show full text]
  • Visiting Judges
    Visiting Judges Marin K. Levy* Despite the fact that Article III judges hold particular seats on particular courts, the federal system rests on judicial interchangeability. Hundreds of judges “visit” other courts each year and collectively help decide thousands of appeals. Anyone from a retired Supreme Court Justice to a judge from the U.S. Court of International Trade to a district judge from out of circuit may come and hear cases on a given court of appeals. Although much has been written about the structure of the federal courts and the nature of Article III judgeships, little attention has been paid to the phenomenon of “sitting by designation”—how it came to be, how it functions today, and what it reveals about the judiciary more broadly. This Article offers an overdue account of visiting judges. It begins by providing an origin story, showing how the current practice stems from two radically different traditions. The first saw judges as fixed geographically, and allowed for visitors only as a stopgap measure when individual judges fell ill or courts fell into arrears with their cases. The second assumed greater fluidity within the courts, requiring Supreme Court Justices to ride circuit—to visit different regions and act as trial and appellate judges—for the first half of the Court’s history. These two traditions together provide the critical context for modern-day visiting. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38ZK55M67 Copyright © 2019 California Law Review, Inc. California Law Review, Inc. (CLR) is a California nonprofit corporation. CLR and the authors are solely responsible for the content of their publications.
    [Show full text]
  • ABA 2010 Annual Meeting Highlights
    Program Highlights ABA Press Room Moscone Center West 2014 Overlook, 2nd Floor Phone: 415-348-4512 Follow the latest ABA news and updates at www.abanow.org. Note: For programs sponsored by the Business Law Section, please see supplement starting on page 46. Thursday, August 5 Time Event Location 08:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. The Journey from Start-up to Mid-size -- What We Learned Moscone Center West Speaker(s): William Bila, Chicago, Illinois, Room 3009 Robert Marks, Chicago, Illinois, 3rd Floor Primary Sponsor: Law Practice Management Section 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. 20/20 Vision: The Impact of Technology Moscone Center West and Globalization on Ethics for the 21st Century Lawyer Room 2016 Moderator(s): Judith Miller, Washington, D.C. 2nd Floor Speaker(s): George Jones Jr., Washington, D.C. Stephanie Kimbro, Wilmington, North Carolina Steven Mark, New South Wales, Australia Primary Sponsor: Commission on Ethics 20/20 Also Sponsored by: International Law, Litigation, Standing Committee on Professional Discipline, Center for Professional Responsibility 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Enforcing a Right to Counsel for Children: The Time is Now Moscone Center West Speaker(s): Hilarie Bass, Miami, Florida Rooms 2001/2003 Judge Rosemary Barkett, U.S. Court of 2nd Floor Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Miami, Florida J.C. Coble, Denver, Colorado Prof. Bruce Green, Fordham Law School, New York, New York Peter Samuelson, Los Angeles, California Alex Smith, Invited, San Francisco, California Primary Sponsor: Litigation Also Sponsored by: Criminal Justice Section, Standing Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defendants, Commission on Homelessness and Poverty, Commission on Youth at Risk, ABA Center on Children and the Law 10:30 a.m.
    [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]
  • Omnipresent Student Speech and the Schoolhouse Gate: Interpreting Tinker in the Digital Age
    Saint Louis University Law Journal Volume 59 Number 2 Current Issues in Education Law Article 9 (Winter 2015) 2015 Omnipresent Student Speech and the Schoolhouse Gate: Interpreting Tinker in the Digital Age Watt Lesley Black Jr. Ph.D. [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Watt L. Black Jr. Ph.D., Omnipresent Student Speech and the Schoolhouse Gate: Interpreting Tinker in the Digital Age, 59 St. Louis U. L.J. (2015). Available at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj/vol59/iss2/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Saint Louis University Law Journal by an authorized editor of Scholarship Commons. For more information, please contact Susie Lee. SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW OMNIPRESENT STUDENT SPEECH AND THE SCHOOLHOUSE GATE: INTERPRETING TINKER IN THE DIGITAL AGE WATT LESLEY BLACK, JR. PH.D.* INTRODUCTION Historically, school authorities rarely took note of student expression that occurred outside of the school setting, but the times have changed. Technological advances have broadened the scope and reach of student speech in ways that were difficult to imagine twenty years ago. Students are using technology to threaten, bully, and harass not only their classmates, but also school employees. School administrators face enormous pressure to effectively address these issues, but they must also consider the First Amendment rights of students when deciding how and when to discipline them for what they say online while off campus.
    [Show full text]
  • Third Judicial Circuit Courts and Community Committee 2019 Activity Report
    THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURTS AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE 2019 ACTIVITY REPORT March 24, 2020 Third Judicial Circuit Courts and Community Committee 2019 Activity Report The governing body of the federal courts, the Judicial Conference of the United States, recently “affirmed that civics education is a core component of judicial service; endorsed regularly-held conferences to share and promote best practices of civics education; and encouraged circuits to coordinate and promote education programs.” The Courts and Community Committee for the Third Judicial Circuit is proud to be part of the judiciary’s national initiative to present and promote civics education programs. The Third Circuit Committee had another busy year in 2019. This Activity Report highlights some of the initiatives that our judges and court staff participated in throughout the year as part of the Committee’s ongoing effort to connect our courts to our communities and improve understanding of the role of the judicial system in our democracy. ADULT CIVICS EDUCATION PROGRAM At the behest of Third Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge D. Brooks Smith, and after many months of planning, the Committee sponsored a ten-week adult civics education course that was launched in September 2019 at the Community College of Philadelphia. Courts and Community Committee Co-Chairs Midge Rendell and Cynthia Rufe created a ten-class curriculum and recruited federal and state judges, as well as attorneys, to lead and present topics of interest for each fifty-minute session on Monday nights during the fall. Dean Dave Thomas, along with strong administrative support, registered over sixty students for the minimal fee certificate course.
    [Show full text]