DOCSLIB.ORG

Honorable Joyce Hens Green

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

HONORABLE JOYCE HENS GREEN Oral History Project The Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit Oral History Project United States Courts The Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit District of Columbia Circuit HONORABLE JOYCE HENS GREEN Interviews conducted by: Jennifer M. Porter, Esquire September 9, September 16, October 6, December 12, 1999 March 3, March 11 , March 13,2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface ...................................................................... i Oral History Agreements ... Honorable Joyce Hens Green ............................................. 111 Jennifer M . Porter. Esquire .............................................. vii Oral History Transcript of Interviews September9. 1999 ....................................................... 1 September16. 1999 ..................................................... 36 October6. 1999 ........................................................ 69 December2. 1999 ..................................................... 106 March3. 2001 ........................................................ 143 Marchll. 2001 ....................................................... 209 March13. 2001 ....................................................... 261 Index ..................................................................... A1 Table of Cases and Statutes ................................................... B1 Biographical Sketches Honorable Joyce Hens Green ............................................ C1 Jennifer M . Porter. Esquire ............................................. C5 NOTE The following pages record interviews conducted on the dates indicated. The interviews were electronically recorded, and the transcription was subsequently reviewed and edited by the interviewee. The contents hereof and all literary rights pertaining hereto are governed by, and are subject to, the Oral History Agreements included herewith. 0 1998 Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. All rights reserved. PREFACE The goal of the Oral History Project of the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit is to preserve the recollections of the judges who sat on the US. Courts of the District of Columbia Circuit, and judges' spouses, lawyers and court staff who played important roles in the history of the Circuit. The Project began in 1991. Most interviews were conducted by volunteers who are members of the Bar of the District of Columbia. Copies of the transcripts of these and additional documents as available - some of which may have been prepared in conjunction with the oral history - are housed in the Judges' Library in the E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse, 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. Inquiries may be made of the Circuit Librarian as to whether the transcripts are available at other locations. Such original audio tapes of the interviews as exist, as well as the original 3.5" diskettes of the transcripts (in Wordperfect format) are in the custody of the Circuit Executive of the U.S. Courts for the District of Columbia Circuit. -1- B Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit Interviewee Oral History Agreement 1. In consideration of the recording and preservation of my oral history memoir by the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, D.C., and its employees and agents (hereinafter "the Society"), and except as otherwise provided herein and in Schedule B attached hereto, I, Joyce Hens Green , do hereby grant and convey to the Society and its successors and assigns all of my rights, title, and interest in the tape recordings, transcripts and computer diskette of interviews of me as described in Schedule A hereto, including literary rights and copyrights. All copies of the tapes, transcripts and diskette are subject to the same restrictions herein provided. 2. The foregoing transfer is subject to the exceptions specified in Schedule B hereto. 3. I also reserve the right to use the tapes, transcripts and diskette and their content as a resource for any book, pamphlet, article or other writing of which I am an author or c 0- author . 4. I authorize the Society, subject to the exceptions specified in Schedule B attached hereto, to duplicate, edit, publish, or permit the use of said tape recordings, transcripts and diskette in any manner that the Society considers appropriate, and I waive any claims I may have or acquire to any royalties from such use. JL-~ L-1 6/27/6; gnature of Interviewee] Date SWOXN 'TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this JTkday of &NC. ,203. Notary Public - L/ MY Commission expires /Q /OGL ACCEPTED this 3p4ay of d% , 200,Iby Daniel M. Gribbon, President of the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. Daniel M. Gribbon ... -111- ORIGINAL Schedule A Tape recording(s) and transcript resulting from Joyce Hens Green Jennifer Porter (number) interviews of conducted by (Interviewee) (Interviewer) on the following dates?’ Date (Month. Day, Year) Number of Tapes Pages of Transcript 9/1/99 1&2A 1-35 9/16/99 2B, 3A&B 36 - 68 10/6/99 4A&B, 5A 69 - 105 12/2/99 5B, 6A&B 106 - 142 3/3/01 7A&B, 8A&B, 9A&B 143 - 208 3/11/01 10A&B, 11A&B, 12A&B 209 - 260 3/13/01 13A6B 261 - 308 The transcripts of the above-identified interviews are coli tained on one diskette. -1 / Identify specifically for each interview, (1) the date thereof,- (2) the number of tapes being conveyed, and (3) the number of pages of the transcript of that interview. -iv- Schedule B Exceptions to Oral History Agreement (Please initial only those provisions that you wish to apply, and only if you wish to limit the use of your interview.) 1. The entire tape, transcript and diskette shall not be made available to anyone other than myself- without my express written permission until d 8 v t' rn L 13. ao o 3 , [identify date or event] whichever just occurs. 2. The following page(s) of the transcript of the interview of me on [date] , and the tape and diskette relating thereto, shall be closed to all users until [identify date or event], except with my express written permission. 3. 2ri-e It is agreed that the Society shall not authorize publication of the transcript or any part thereof during my lifetime without my express written permission, but that the Society may authorize scholars, researchers and others to make reasonable quotations therefrom without my written permission. 4. It is agreed that the Society shall not authorize publication by others of the transcript or any part thereof, including brief quotations, during my lifetime without my express written permission. 5. I retain all of my right, title, and interest in the tapes, transcripts and diskette and their content, including literary rights and copyrights, until [identify date or event], at which time these rights shall vest in the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. 6. >&4- In the event of my incapacity, I designate *~17 c.s H 1 GREE I\I of d ai=L e.& 1 BhLTl wok, (me)m, d , a, (address) to make decisions related to the use of the interview of me. Upon the death or incapacity of this designee, I authorize the Society to make such decisions on my behalf. 7. I impose the following conditions: [describe] -V- Standard Form INTERVIEWER ORAL HISTORY AGREEMENT Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit Oral History Agreement of Jennifer M. Porter 1. Having agreed to conduct an oral history interview with Judge Joyce Hens Green for the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, D.C., and its employees and agents (hereinafter “the Society”), I, Jennifer M. Porter, do hereby grant and convey to the Society and its successors and assigns, all of my right, title, and interest in the tape recordings, transcripts and computer diskette of interviews, as described in Schedule A hereto, including literary rights and copyrights. 2. I authorize the Society to duplicate, edit, publish, including publication on the internet, or permit the use of said tape recordings, transcriptsand diskette in any manner that the Society considers appropriate, and I waive any claims I may have or acquire to any royalties from such use. 3. I agree that I will make no use of the interview or the information contained therein until it is concluded and edited, or until I receive permission from the Society. ___I---- ---- F [Signature of Interviewer] Date S WORH TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this /b day of ld~ie~j-,-Qx, ,2004. P ACCEPTED this ?5b ’day of hhhb , 20042 by Stephen J. Pollak, President of the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. n Stepkn Uollak -vii- ORIGINAL Schedule A Tape recording(s) and transcript resulting from Joyce Hens Green Jennifer Porter (number) interviews of conducted by (Interviewee) (I 11ter vi ew er) on the following dates?’ Date (Month. Dall. Year) Number of Tapes Pages of Transcript 9/1/99 1&2A 1-35 9/16/99 2B, 3A6B 36 - 68 10/6/99 4A&B, 5A 69 - 105 12/2/99 5B, 6A&B 106 - 142 3/3/01 7A&B, 8A&B, 9A&B 143 - 208 3/11/01 10A63, 11A&B, 12A&B 209 - 260 3/13/01 13A&B 261 -308 The transcripts of the above-identified interviews are contained on one diskette. a/ Identify specifically for each interview, (1) the date thereof,. (2) the number of tapes being conveyed, and (3) the number of pages of the transcript of that interview. ... -v111- ORAL HISTORY OF HONORABLE JOYCE HENS GREEN First Interview – September 1, 1999 This interview is being conducted on behalf of the Oral History Project of the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. The interviewee is Judge Joyce Hens Green. The interviewer is Jennifer Porter. The interview is taking place in the judge's chambers at the United States Courthouse on September 1, 1999, beginning at 3:00 in the afternoon. (TAPE 1) MS. PORTER: Judge Green, we've been meaning to do this tape for a long time and now this is finally the day. I want to know for the record here about your childhood and your parents and your family background. Would you like to lead off with the history of your life? JUDGE GREEN: I'll be delighted to do so, particularly since we're on the cusp of the millennium.
Recommended publications
  • Government Turns the Other Way As Judges Make Findings About Torture and Other Abuse

    Government Turns the Other Way As Judges Make Findings About Torture and Other Abuse

    USA SEE NO EVIL GOVERNMENT TURNS THE OTHER WAY AS JUDGES MAKE FINDINGS ABOUT TORTURE AND OTHER ABUSE Amnesty International Publications First published in February 2011 by Amnesty International Publications International Secretariat Peter Benenson House 1 Easton Street London WC1X 0DW United Kingdom www.amnesty.org Copyright Amnesty International Publications 2011 Index: AMR 51/005/2011 Original Language: English Printed by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United Kingdom All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publishers. Amnesty International is a global movement of 2.2 million people in more than 150 countries and territories, who campaign on human rights. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments. We research, campaign, advocate and mobilize to end abuses of human rights. Amnesty International is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion. Our work is largely financed by contributions from our membership and donations CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 Judges point to human rights violations, executive turns away ........................................... 4 Absence
  • Business Law Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School

    Business Law Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School

    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Supreme Court Preview Conferences, Events, and Lectures 2005 Section 6: Business Law Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School, "Section 6: Business Law" (2005). Supreme Court Preview. 174. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview/174 Copyright c 2005 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview VI. BUSINESS In This Section: New Case: 03-1238 IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, et al. Synopsis and Question Presented p. 308 New Case: 04-0066 Tum v. Barber Foods Synopsis and Question Presented p. 315 "Local Attorneys Gearing up for Supreme Court" Francis B. Allgood p. 321 "Tyson Asks Court to Resolve Pay Dispute" Tony Mauro p. 324 "Workers Sue for Back Pay at Barber" Peter Pochna p. 326 "Court Rules Tyson Fresh Meats Must Pay $3.1 Million to Wallua, Wash. Workers" Jeff St. John p. 328 New Case: 04-805 Texaco, Inc. v. Dagher Synopsis and Question Presented p. 330 "Oil Giants Take on Gas Station Owners" Alexis Grant p. 336 "FTC, DOJ Pitch Joint Venture Ruling" Cecile Kohrs Lindell p. 338 "Gasoline Price-Fixing Suit Reinstated" David Kravets p. 339 "Gas Pains; L.A. Lawyer Tom Bleau Takes Service Station Woes to the Court" Bob Burtman p. 340 New Case: 04-1329 Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. Synopsis and Question Presented p.
  • United States District Court for the District of Columbia

    United States District Court for the District of Columbia

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) SHAFIQ RASUL, et al. ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 02-CV-0299 (CKK) ) GEORGE WALKER BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) FAWZI KHALID ABDULLAH FAHAD ) AL ODAH, et al. ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 02-CV-0828 (CKK) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) MAMDOUH HABIB, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 02-CV-1130 (CKK) ) GEORGE WALKER BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) MURAT KURNAZ, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1135 (ESH) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) OMAR KHADR, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1136 (JDB) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) MOAZZAM BEGG, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1137 (RMC) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) MOURAD BENCHELLALI, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1142 (RJL) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) JAMIL EL-BENNA, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1144 (RWR) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) FALEN GHEREBI, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1164 (RBW) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) LAKHDAR BOUMEDIENE, et al.,) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1166 (RJL) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) President of the United States, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) ) SUHAIL ABDUL ANAM, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) v. ) Civil Action No.
  • Council and Participants

    Council and Participants

    The American Law Institute OFFICERSt Roswell B. Perkins, Chair of the Council Michael Traynor, President Conrad K. Harper, 1st Vice President Elizabeth Warren, 2nd Vice President Bennett Boskey, Treasurer Lance Liebman, Director Elena A. Cappella, Deputy Director Michael Greenwald, Deputy Director COUNCILt Kenneth S. Abraham Charlottesville Virginia Shirley S. Abrahamson Madison Wisconsin Philip S. Anderson Little Rock Arkansas Susan Frelich Appleton St. Louis Missouri Richard Sheppard Arnold Little Rock Arkansas Jos6 1. Astigarraga Miami Florida Sheila L. Birnbaum New York New York Allen D. Black Philadelphia Pennsylvania Bennett Boskey Washington District of Columbia Amelia H. Boss Philadelphia Pennsylvania Michael Boudin Boston Massachusetts William M. Burke New York New York Elizabeth J. Cabraser San Francisco California Hugh Calkins Cleveland Ohio Gerhard Casper Stanford California William T. Coleman, Jr. Washington District of Columbia Edward H. Cooper Ann Arbor Michigan N. Lee Cooper Birmingham Alabama Roger C. Cramton Ithaca New York Lloyd N. Cutler Washington District of Columbia George H.T. Dudley St. Thomas U.S. Virgin Islands Christine M. Durham Salt Lake City Utah William H. Erickson Denver Colorado Thomas E. Fairchild Madison Wisconsin John P. Frank Phoenix Arizona George Clemon Freeman, Jr. Richmond Virginia Paul L. Friedman Washington District of Columbia Antonio Garcfa-Padilla San Juan Puerto Rico Conrad K. Harper New York New York Geoffrey C. Hazard, Jr.* Philadelphia Pennsylvania D. Brock Hornby Portland Maine Vester T. Hughes, Jr. Dallas Texas Mary Kay Kane San Francisco California Herma Hill Kay Berkeley California rAs of January 2, 2002 "Director Emeritus Carolyn Dineen King Houston Texas Carolyn B. Laminm Washington District of Columbia Douglas Laycock Austin Texas Pierre N.
  • In the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

    In the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

    PREVIOUSLY CLEARED FOR FILING WITH COURT SECURITY OFFICE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) JARALLAH AL-MARRI, et al., ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-2035 (GK) ) GEORGE W. BUSH, ) STATUS REPORT President of the United States, ) et al., ) ) Respondents. ) ) By and through undersigned counsel, Petitioner Jarallah al-Marri submits this Status Report to inform the Court of his position in light of the following recent developments. I. SUMMARY OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS On December 28, 2004, Respondents moved to dismiss Mr. al-Marri’s habeas petition. The Motion was fully briefed in accordance with the Order of the Honorable Joyce Hens Green dated December 16, 2004, which was issued pursuant to this Court’s Order of November 29, 2004, transferring this case to Judge Green for coordination and management as reflected in the September 15, 2004, Resolution of the Executive Session. On January 31, 2004, Judge Green issued a Memorandum Opinion Denying in Part and Granting in Part Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss (“January 31, 2005 Order”) in eleven of the coordinated cases.1 That Order did not apply to eight other cases, including Mr. al-Marri’s case. January 31, 2005 Order at 15 & n.15. The court stated that “while the Judges assigned to those cases [including Mr. al-Marri’s case] 1 See Case Nos. 02-CV-0299 (CKK), 02-CV-0828 (CKK), 02-CV-1130 (CKK), 04-CV-1135 (ESH), 04-CV-1136 (JDB), 04-CV-1137 (RMC), 04-CV-1144 (RWR), 04-CV-1164 (RBW), 04-CV-1194 (HHK), 04-CV-1227 (RBW), and 04-CV-1254 (HHK).
  • Fighting Injustice

    Fighting Injustice

    Fighting Injustice by Michael E. Tigar Copyright © 2001 by Michael E. Tigar All rights reserved CONTENTS Introduction 000 Prologue It Doesn’t Get Any Better Than This 000 Chapter 1 The Sense of Injustice 000 Chapter 2 What Law School Was About 000 Chapter 3 Washington – Unemployment Compensation 000 Chapter 4 Civil Wrongs 000 Chapter 5 Divisive War -- Prelude 000 Chapter 6 Divisive War – Draft Board Days and Nights 000 Chapter 7 Military Justice Is to Justice . 000 Chapter 8 Chicago Blues 000 Chapter 9 Like A Bird On A Wire 000 Chapter 10 By Any Means Necessary 000 Chapter 11 Speech Plus 000 Chapter 12 Death – And That’s Final 000 Chapter 13 Politics – Not As Usual 000 Chapter 14 Looking Forward -- Changing Direction 000 Appendix Chronology 000 Afterword 000 SENSING INJUSTICE, DRAFT OF 7/11/13, PAGE 2 Introduction This is a memoir of sorts. So I had best make one thing clear. I am going to recount events differently than you may remember them. I will reach into the stream of memory and pull out this or that pebble that has been cast there by my fate. The pebbles when cast may have had jagged edges, now worn away by the stream. So I tell it as memory permits, and maybe not entirely as it was. This could be called lying, but more charitably it is simply what life gives to each of us as our memories of events are shaped in ways that give us smiles and help us to go on. I do not have transcripts of all the cases in the book, so I recall them as well as I can.
  • President Bush's Judicial Nominations During the 101St and 102Nd

    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.
  • The Following Interview Is Being Conducted on Behalf of The

    The Following Interview Is Being Conducted on Behalf of The

    ORAL HISTORY OF HONORABLE JOYCE HENS GREEN Sixth Interview – March 11, 2001 MS. PORTER: The following interview is being conducted on behalf of the Oral History Project of the District of Columbia Circuit. The interviewee is Judge Joyce Hens Green, the interviewer is Jennifer Porter. The interview is taking place at the judge's chambers on Sunday, March 11, 2001. It is now 11:20 a.m. Now Joyce, didn't you have some libel cases that were of interest to you and probably also to posterity? JUDGE GREEN: Well, if I start with the first one, I'm not so sure posterity is holding its breath. This 1985 jury action involved the Liberty Lobby, Inc. and its chair, Willis Carto, and the National Review and its chair, William Buckley, Jr. A libel action of one conservative opinion magazine and its principal versus another conservative opinion magazine and its principal. The men had been great friends in past years and then had come to a division of their ways. Most interesting thing about the claims and counterclaims were the lawyers involved, and Mr. Buckley, who performed much like he did on his own television show. At one point, slouching in the witness chair, he turned to me to ask if he could leave because he had a very important speaking engagement and had to catch a plane. When I said "No," he kept insisting that he was losing a great deal of money. The jury overheard this and did not appear impressed by his attitude. A news weekly reported a little bit about this trial and that a judge in Washington had denied Buckley his way.
  • The Continuing Pursuit of Unchecked Executive Power 13 May 2005 AI Index: AMR 51/063/2005

    The Continuing Pursuit of Unchecked Executive Power 13 May 2005 AI Index: AMR 51/063/2005

    Public amnesty international UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Guantánamo and beyond: The continuing pursuit of unchecked executive power 13 May 2005 AI Index: AMR 51/063/2005 I used to think that America had respect for human rights when it came to prison. Mohammed Nechle, extrajudicially removed from Bosnia and Herzegovina by US agents1 My husband is a tall man with black hair and black eyes…He is now imprisoned in Guantánamo. We don’t know why. Wife of Mohammed Nechle, Algerian national, 20042 Public ........................................................................................................................ - 1 - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .......................................................................... - 1 - Guantánamo and beyond: The continuing pursuit of unchecked executive power .. - 1 - 1. Summary: The pursuit of unfettered executive power .................................. - 3 - 2. Violating human rights erodes security and trust in government ............... - 10 - 3. Guantánamo detainees – the international legal framework ....................... - 13 - 4. Hypocrisy vs. human rights ........................................................................ - 15 - 5. Human rights law rejected by a war mentality ........................................... - 28 - 6. Seeking to render the Rasul decision meaningless ..................................... - 45 - 7. A judge with security credentials takes a more critical view ..................... - 52 - 8. The Combatant Status Review Tribunal – no laughing matter ..................
  • The Historical Journey of Black Women to the Nation's Highest Courts

    The Historical Journey of Black Women to the Nation's Highest Courts

    Black Women Judges: The Historical Journey of Black Women to the Nation’s Highest Courts THE H ON . A NNA B LACKBURNE -R IGSBY * INTRODUCTION . 646 I. BENEFITS TO HAVING A DIVERSE APPELLATE JUDICIARY . 649 II. PLACING THE FIRST BLACK MALE JUDGES AND FIRST WHITE WOMEN JUDGES INTO HISTORICAL CONTEXT . 652 A. Reconstruction: 1865-1877 . 653 B. End of Reconstruction: 1877 . 654 C. The Women’s Suffrage Movement: 1800-1920. 655 D. World War I: 1914-1918 (America entered the war in 1917) . 656 E. Great Migration: 1910-1930 . 657 F. World War II: 1939-1945 (America entered the war in 1941) . 658 * The Hon. Anna Blackburne-Rigsby is an Associate Judge on the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. She was nominated to the court by President George W. Bush in 2006. Prior to that, she served for six years on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, nominated in 2000 by President William Jefferson Clinton. Prior to that appointment, she served for five years as a Magistrate Judge on the District of Columbia Superior Court. Judge Blackburne-Rigsby is married to Judge Robert R. Rigsby, Associate Judge of the District of Columbia Superior Court and a Colonel and Military Judge in the United States Army Reserves. They have one son, Julian. Judge Blackburne-Rigsby is the daughter of Justice Laura D. Blackburne, retired, New York State Supreme Court. Judge Blackburne-Rigsby acknowledges with gratitude the assistance of her research assis- tant, Precious Boone, Esq., a graduate of Cornell Law School. Judge Blackburne-Rigsby also acknowledges the assistance of Dr.
  • Judicial Restraint and the New War Powers

    Judicial Restraint and the New War Powers

    FEATURES The Contemporary Presidency Judicial Restraint and the New War Powers JASMINE FARRIER University of Louisville Over the past four decades, members of Congress have filed 10 lawsuits challenging military actions abroad that were ordered or sustained by presidents without prior legisla- tive consent. In dismissing these cases, federal courts told the plaintiffs to use their legisla- tive tools to show disapproval of the actions already in progress. Under this logic, the House and Senate must have a veto-proof supermajority to end an existing military engage- ment before a case can be heard on the merits. These precedents contrast with previous war powers cases initiated by private litigants, which focused on prior simple majority legisla- tive authority for presidential action. [I]t is the exclusive province of [C]ongress to change a state of peace into a state of war. (United States v. Smith 1806, 1230) [I]t is error to suppose that every case or controversy which touches foreign relations lies beyond judicial cognizance. (Baker v. Carr 1962, 211-12) [N]one of the legislation drawn to the court’s attention may serve as a valid assent to the Vietnam War. Yet it does not follow that plaintiffs are entitled to prevail. (Mitchell v. Laird 1973, 616). War Is a Three-Branch Question From the founding to 1950, war usually proceeded in constitutional order: congres- sional authorization followed by executive enforcement. Over that century and a half, fed- eral judges adjudicated dozens of war-related disputes raised by private litigants that hinged on executive branch adherence to Congress’s prior legislative direction.
  • LOOKING BACK Movingforward

    LOOKING BACK Movingforward

    2017 ANNUAL DINNER & CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION #WBA2017ANNUALDINNER #WBACENTENNIAL LOOKING BACK @WBADC @WBAF [email protected] [email protected] WBADC.ORG WBADCFOUNDATION.ORG MovingForward © 2017 WOMEN’S BAR ASSOCIATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 2017 NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM Welcome Remarks 2016-2017 WBA President Sonia W. Murphy White & Case LLP Greetings and Proclamation of WBA Day Muriel Bowser Mayor District of Columbia Greetings Linda A. Klein President Thi s American Bar Association Dinner Served WBA President’s Report Evening Sonia W. Murphy WBA Foundation President’s Report Monica G. Parham Centennial Celebration 2017 Woman Lawyer of the Year Ana C. Reyes Partner and Co-Chair of the International Litigation Practice Group Williams & Connolly LLP Closing Remarks 2017-2018 WBA President Kerri Castellini Price Benowitz LLP 1 Presidents’ Greeting Welcome to the Annual Dinner of the Women’s Bar Association of the District of Columbia and the Women’s Bar Association Foundation. At this evening’s event, we celebrate 100 years of service to women in the profession, as this day — May 17 — marks the 100th anniversary of the Association’s founding. Tonight, we Look Back and Move Forward, recognizing our many accomplishments, while acknowledging the work that remains for us as advocates for women in the profession, and understanding that the work of the Association and Foundation remains vital today. We are proud to welcome the Honorable Muriel Bowser, Mayor, District of Columbia, to bring greetings on behalf of our great city and to proclaim this day as “Women’s Bar Association of the District of Columbia Day.” We are also pleased to welcome Linda A.