DOCSLIB.ORG

AAAL Fall Meeting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AAAL Fall Meeting NEWSLETTER OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF APPELLATE LAWYERS n 2015 ISSUE 2 CONTENTS 1 AAAL Fall Meeting 2 Report on Sessions at the 2015 Spring Meeting 3 President’s Column: Walking Roads Paved With Meaning 10 Eisenberg Prize 11 Profiles of Inductees at 2015 Spring Meeting in Santa Fe, New Mexico 14 Isn’t That Special—Florida Adopts a New Harmless Error Rule 17 Strategic Initiatives: Report on the Oral Argument Task Force 18 Getting Ahead in the Academy AAAL Fall Meeting 20 Cases Involving Appellate Practice and Procedure From the Supreme Court’s November 7–9, 2015 October Term 2014 The Willard Hotel . Washington, D.C. 22 Report on FRAP Brief Length Imbroglio 23 From the Editor: Miscellany By Matt Lembke, Program Chair The Academy will celebrate its 25th anniversary at the AAAL Fall Meeting, being held November 7–9, 2015, at the historic Willard IMPORTANT DATES Hotel in Washington, D.C., just a block from the White House. 2015 Fall Meeting Washington, D.C. The highlight of the meeting is sure to be the Induction Cer- November 7–9, 2015 emony and Dinner on Monday, November 9, which will occur 2015 Spring Meeting in the Great Hall at the Supreme Court of the United States. Seattle, Washington March 31–April 2, 2016 Immediately preceding the dinner, Chief Justice John Roberts, an Academy judicial fellow, will present the Kathleen McCree Lewis Award to Justice Anthony Kennedy in recognition of Justice Kennedy’s 40 years of service to the nation and to the rule of law as an appellate judge. The award presentation will be made in the Supreme Court’s courtroom. The Fall Meeting will begin on the evening of Saturday, November 7, with a welcome reception at The Willard. The Academy is grateful for the law firms of numerous [continued on page 10] Report on Sessions at the 2015 Spring Meeting Report on the Santa Fe discussed at the 2014 Fall Meeting allows the public to observe the Gables Sessions in Coral Gables. Comments received appellate process, thus performing a Fellows who gathered at the Spring there led to a revised report, which “critical civics function”; and it lets 2015 meeting in Santa Fe heard a the board of directors has reviewed lawyers see how judges analyze cases, variety of presentations focused on and approved. which improves appellate advocacy. the present state of appellate practice, with a special focus on oral argument, The revised report begins by noting As Nancy explained, the report identi- the uses (and misuses) of technology, the sad fact that oral argument is fies several “steps” that “stakeholders” and appellate ethics. Thanks go to in decline in most appellate courts in the appellate process can take “to fellows Barry Ashe, Tom Christ, nationwide. Oral argument is allowed improve the quality and increase the Jerry Ganzfried, Ken Masters, Bill in fewer and fewer cases, and even frequency” of oral argument: Quirk, and Janet Schroer, who pro- when allowed, less time is allotted vided the individual session reports. for it. That’s sad, the report explains, . Courts should be receptive to because oral argument provides some litigants’ requests for argument, Report of the Task Force on clear benefits. It brings the judges and especially requests that are made Oral Argument counsel together for “collaborative” soon after briefing and that identify Fellow Nancy Winkleman led a review of cases and thus improves the aspects of the appeal for which discussion of the latest draft of the decision-making process; it assures argument would be helpful. report of the Academy’s Oral Argu- litigants that their case has the court’s . Courts should issue more “focus” ment Task Force. An earlier draft was full attention, at least for a time; it letters, identifying the issues on which counsel should focus their arguments. Courts should “develop a hot-but- courteous culture of oral argument.” . Courts should make better use of technology, including argument by “video-conferencing” when per- sonal appearance is inconvenient. Courts should “consider allow- ing argument in some apparently routine cases on condition that the arguing attorney is a junior lawyer, for example, [one] with fewer than five years in practice.” Oral argument task force: Roger Townsend, Dan Polsenberg, Matt Lembke, [continued on page 4] Nancy Winkleman, Jim Martin, and Mike Traynor. Page 2 THE APPELLatE ADVOCatE n 2015 ISSUE 2 PRESIDENT’S COLUMN Walking Roads Paved With Meaning By President Charles A. Bird, McKenna, Long & Aldridge LLP, San Diego, California Forty percent of us are thinking firm mergers, it’s comfortable and I just loved it from the first time I about retirement in the next five inescapable to recognize otherwise. touched good stone. years. When I first read this, I was shocked. Then I remembered I would Roads often diverged in a yellow Why did Bob Boochever invite me have said the same four years ago, wood. What I’ve planned, earned, to be his Alaska Supreme Court and I remembered why I am not or deserved only partly explains law clerk? Did some whisperer say, making plans now. those opportunities. Others’ choices “teach this man to fly-fish, and he were involved, and I am immensely will reward you by doing good law”? When the nominating committee grateful for their kindness, integrity, Why did I accept this over better- and board offered me the opportu- and risk-tolerance. So too for the traveled roads? nity to proceed through the offices unexpected and inexplicable chances. to president of AAAL, I chose that And the choices that made all the I am very grateful to have served you road. Planning retirement seemed difference? I see now that they were as president for 2015. Perhaps it won’t a different road to a different place. filled as much with good guidance be long before I revisit the core prob- Thinking I could come back to the and good fortune as they were with lem of retirement: finding new and untaken path later, I resolved to fol- my own reasoning. different meaning. Much is expected low my choice. from those to whom much is given. Take, for example, the guys who Expectations bestow meaning. All My law firm has merged twice while taught me to rock climb when I who qualify for this Academy have I have served in AAAL offices. I’m was 40. And making the transition the privilege of walking roads paved now an enthusiastic partner of Den- from litigator-who-loved-appeals to with meaning. It’s hard to exit. tons US, LLC, hoping and helping genuine appellate lawyer. To climb to plan a national appellate practice. safely and enjoy it, you must plan, This is another road opened primar- control your state of mind, execute ily by others. facing real danger, and serve your partner as if your lives depend on it Even without thinking of retirement, (they do). Along with reading John I find myself looking back full of McPhee and Annie Dillard, I had no gratitude. Like many in our profes- better training for appellate practice. sion, sometimes I indulge a myth that I planned and made my own But I neither planned to climb paths and then took the best of them. nor earned a right to be taught by But from perspectives like being the wonderful partners. I did not know Academy’s president and riding law climbing would relate to appeals. THE APPELLatE ADVOCatE n 2015 ISSUE 2 Page 3 Report on Sessions at the 2015 Spring Meeting [continued from page 2] In the discussion that followed Nan- lawyers, a panel consisting of AAAL technology can best aid us in work- cy’s presentation, the recommenda- fellows David F. Herr, Wendy C. ing with a record, improving our tion that got the most attention—and Lascher, Eric J. Magnuson, and brief-writing, and communicating perhaps the most pushback—was the Robin Meadow explained how they with clients or associated counsel one to allow oral argument on condi- are using technology in their practices about an appeal. tion that a junior lawyer argues. Some and moderated a discussion of best fellows in the audience thought that practices in technology for appellate In addressing the question of why proposal would sacrifice the client’s lawyers among the fellows gathered technology, Mr. Magnuson reported interest in the presentation of its case in Santa Fe. on the results of a survey of fellows to the court’s interest in training that attempted to ascertain what was young lawyers. The recommenda- of most interest to them, how they are tion seemed, to some fellows, to give using technology in their practices, clients a choice between not having the benefits they have seen, and the oral argument and not having oral tools they wish were available. The argument by their preferred lawyer. survey will be posted on the website. Other fellows expressed concern that Reviewing some of the survey results, busy appellate courts would be reluc- Mr. Magnuson explained that we are tant to accept “bad arguments” by in a Windows world, and a Word Robin Meadow, Eric J. Magnuson, young lawyers in the hope that it will and Wendy C. Lascher for the Voodoo environment; a world moving away eventually lead to better arguments. seminar. from the dictaphone to speech-to-text transcription; and a world in which most lawyers use styles and templates. Mr. Magnuson said that technology is not optional: courts will make you use it. As he explained, we are in the communications business; if we are not heard, we cannot be effective. Efficiency is the prevailing mantra of both federal and state courts.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SUMMER | 2021 Lawyering in the Age of Covid-19 Lawyering in Theageof American College of Trial Lawyers JOURNAL
    ISSUE 96 | SUMMER | 2021 Lawyering in theageof Covid-19 American College of Trial Lawyers JOURNAL Chancellor-Founder Hon. Emil Gumpert contents (1895-1982) 02 04 05 OFFICERS Letter from the Editor Annual Meeting President’s The College RODNEY ACKER President Announcement Perspective Welcomes New MICHAEL L. O’DONNELL President-Elect Officers & Regents SUSAN J. HARRIMAN Treasurer WILLIAM J. MURPHY Secretary DOUGLAS R. YOUNG Immediate Past President MEETING RECAP BOARD OF REGENTS 09 15 19 25 RODNEY ACKER DAN S. FOLLUO CLE: The 25th Anniversary The Honorable Brian Brurud - Check 6 Scientific Collaboration in Dallas, Texas Tulsa, Oklahoma of the VMI Case: Mark E. Recktenwald – Access to The Fight Against Covid-19 PETER AKMAJIAN LARRY H. KRANTZ Remembering RBG Justice In the Age Of COVID Tucson, Arizona New York, New York SUSAN S. BREWER MARTIN F. MURPHY Morgantown, West Virginia Boston, Massachusetts JOE R. CALDWELL, JR. WILLIAM J. MURPHY Washington, D.C. Baltimore, Maryland 31 37 41 47 JOHN A. DAY MICHAEL L. O’DONNELL Brentwood, Tennessee Denver, Colorado The Importance of Dr. Patrick Connor — A Conversation With Never Out Of The Fight — Separate Opinions — Treating Panthers the Former President the Eddie Gallagher RICHARD H. DEANE, JR. LYN P. PRUITT Professor Melvin Urofsky of the United States Court Martial Atlanta, Georgia Little Rock, Arkansas MONA T. DUCKETT, Q.C. JEFFREY E. STONE Edmonton, Alberta Chicago, Illinois GREGORY M. LEDERER MICHAEL J. SHEPARD Cedar Rapids, Iowa San Francisco, California 53 59 65 67 Michele Bratcher Goodwin Defending the Skies — Heather Younger — Spring 2021 SANDRA A. FORBES CATHERINE RECKER — Quarantine: The Reach and General Victor Eugene Building Resistence Induction Ceremony Toronto, Ontario Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Limits of Government Action Renuart, Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh: His Jurisprudence and Potential Impact on the Supreme Court
    Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh: His Jurisprudence and Potential Impact on the Supreme Court Andrew Nolan, Coordinator Section Research Manager Caitlain Devereaux Lewis, Coordinator Legislative Attorney August 21, 2018 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R45293 SUMMARY R45293 Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh: His Jurisprudence August 21, 2018 and Potential Impact on the Supreme Court Andrew Nolan, On July 9, 2018, President Donald J. Trump announced the nomination of Judge Brett M. Coordinator Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) to fill Section Research Manager retiring Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court of the United States. [email protected] Nominated to the D.C. Circuit by President George W. Bush, Judge Kavanaugh has served on Caitlain Devereaux Lewis, that court for more than twelve years. In his role as a Circuit Judge, the nominee has authored Coordinator roughly three hundred opinions (including majority opinions, concurrences, and dissents) and Legislative Attorney adjudicated numerous high-profile cases concerning, among other things, the status of wartime [email protected] detainees held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; the constitutionality of the current structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; the validity of rules issued by the For a copy of the full report, Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act; and the legality of the Federal please call 7-5700 or visit Communications Commission’s net neutrality rule. Since joining the D.C. Circuit, Judge www.crs.gov. Kavanaugh has also taught courses on the separation of powers, national security law, and constitutional interpretation at Harvard Law School, Yale Law School, and the Georgetown University Law Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Filling the D.C. Circuit Vacancies Carl W
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Law Faculty Publications School of Law 2015 Filling the D.C. Circuit Vacancies 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, Judges Commons, and the President/Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation Carl W. Tobias, Filling the D.C. Circuit Vacancies, 91 Ind. L.J. 121 (2015). 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]. INDIANA LAW JOURNAL Volume 91 Number 1 Early Winter 2015 © Copyright 2015 by the Trustees of Indiana University CONTENTS SYMPOSIUM: ACADEMIC FREEDOM FOR THE NEXT 100 YEARS FOREW ORD .............................................................................. Steve Sanders 1 THE SOCIAL VALUE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM DEFENDED ...... J. PeterByrne 5 ACADEMIC DUTY AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM .............................. Amy Gajda 17 THE REGRETTABLE UNDERENFORCEMENT OF INCOMPETENCE AS CAUSE To DISMISS TENURED FACULTY ............... David M Rabban 39 AAUP 1915 STATEMENT ON ACADEMIC FREEDOM ....................................... 57 ARTICLES THE GOVERNMENT'S LIES AND THE CONSTITUTION ................ Helen Norton 73 FILLING THE D.C. CIRCUIT VACANCIES ...................................... Carl Tobias 121 NOTES INCENTIVIZING THE PROTECTION OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING CONSUMER DATA AFTER THE HOME DEPOT BREACH ............................... Ryan F. Manion 143 No ORDINARY FISH TALE: WORKING TOWARD A TRANSNATIONAL SOLUTION TO THE COD CRISIS IN THE GULF OF MAINE ............ Michael Ruderman 165 Filling the D.C. Circuit Vacancies CARL TOBIAS* IN TR OD UCTION .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cooperative Judicial Nominations During the Obama Administration
    GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2017 Cooperative Judicial Nominations During the Obama Administration David Fontana George Washington University Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Fontana, David, Cooperative Judicial Nominations During the Obama Administration (March 28, 2017). Wisconsin Law Review, Forthcoming; GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2017-24; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-24. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2942297 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FONTANA – FORTHCOMING – WISCONSIN LAW REVIEW (2017) 3/28/2017 COOPERATIVE JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DAVID FONTANA Introduction ................................................................... 101 I. Naming ..................................................................... 108 II. Numbing ................................................................... 124 III. Numbers .................................................................. 130 Conclusion .................................................................... 138 INTRODUCTION During his eight years in office, President Barack Obama changed
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 113 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 113 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 159 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2013 No. 167 Senate The Senate met at 10:30 a.m. and was WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT OF sanctions have brought Iran to the ne- called to order by the President pro 2013 gotiating table. tempore (Mr. LEAHY). Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to I believe we must do everything pos- proceed to Calendar No. 243, S. 1356, the sible to stop Iran from getting nuclear PRAYER Workforce Investment Act of 2013. weapons capability, which would threaten Israel and the national secu- The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the bill by title. rity of our great country. fered the following prayer: The Obama administration is in the The assistant legislative clerk read Let us pray. midst of negotiations with the Iranians as follows: Eternal Lord God, the giver of every that are designed to end their nuclear good and perfect gift, during this Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 243, S. weapons program. We all strongly sup- 1356, a bill to amend the Workforce Invest- Thanksgiving season, we lift grateful port those negotiations and hope they hearts to You in prayer. Thank You for ment Act of 1998 to strengthen the United States workforce development system will succeed, and we want them to the splash of raindrops, for the warmth through innovation in, and alignment and produce the strongest possible agree- of sunshine, for the melody of the improvement of, employment, training, and ment.
    [Show full text]
  • On Appeal | SPRING 2020 on VOLUME V, NUMBER 1 Appeal SPRING 2020 a Member Benefit of the Appellate Practice Section of the Virginia Bar Association
    On Appeal | SPRING 2020 On VOLUME V, NUMBER 1 Appeal SPRING 2020 A member benefit of the Appellate Practice Section of The Virginia Bar Association Two Centuries of Virginia in the Supreme Court By Toby Heytens* The first time Virginia was called to argue before the Brown v. Board of Education overturned Virginia’s school U.S. Supreme Court, no one showed up.1 Perhaps that is not segregation policy,12 and Loving v. Virginia invalidated the surprising, because the issue in Grayson v. Virginia was Commonwealth’s ban on interracial marriage.13 As Virginia whether (and if so how) a court could serve process on a leaders engaged in a campaign of “massive resistance” State.2 Since then, however, the Commonwealth has hardly against desegregation and resisted Brown’s requirements, been absent. Rather, Virginia has frequently appeared before Griffin v. County School Board14 and Green v. County the Court, both to help extend the Constitution’s protections School Board15 directed the Commonwealth to act to formerly excluded groups and — sometimes famously — affirmatively to ensure that public schools remained open to oppose that expansion. and desegregated.16 Early Years The court also struck down other Virginia laws excluding Many of Virginia’s early cases reflected controversies communities from the full benefits of citizenship, from the 17 over jurisdiction and treatment of other states’ citizens. In Commonwealth’s segregation of vehicle passengers, to its 18 pre-Civil War decisions, the Court held that the Eleventh poll tax. When Virginia criminalized NAACP activities by Amendment’s adoption was constitutional even without “proscribing any arrangement by which prospective litigants 19 a presidential signature,3 that it had appellate jurisdiction are advised to seek the assistance of particular attorneys,” over state proceedings against citizens of other states,4 and the court held that the law violated the First Amendment’s 20 that Congress’s power to create criminal law was limited protection of “vigorous advocacy.” In Davis v.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S4511
    June 17, 2013 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4511 these counterterrorism programs. undergraduate and law degrees from for this position, and I am very pleased These programs are legal, constitu- the University of New Mexico, a school to be here today to support him. tional, and utilized only under the that I am proud to call my alma mater. Ken has a long and distinguished strict oversight of both parties and all After graduating he was a law clerk record of public service, including more three branches of government, includ- to New Mexico Supreme Court Justice than a decade of service in our mili- ing a highly scrutinized judicial proc- Joseph Baca, and he worked as a legis- tary. Ken has served as the U.S. attor- ess. In the end, these programs rely on lative assistant for Senator Jeff Binga- ney for New Mexico since April 2010. the trust of the American people. And man. His elevation to lead that office fol- with that trust lacking today, I am He began his career as a Federal lowed more than a decade of service asking my fellow Members of Congress, prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Of- there as an assistant U.S. attorney. I as well as the media, to fact-check first fice for the District of New Mexico in would like to highlight at least one of before mischaracterizing programs 1999, prosecuting a wide range of Fed- his many accomplishments that I find that save lives. eral offenses, including narcotics and particularly important. I believe we can—and we must—pro- violent crime cases.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Fall.Indd
    A PUBLICATION OF THE SILHA CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF MEDIA ETHICS AND LAW | FALL 2019 D.C. Circuit Upholds Net Neutrality Repeal But Prevents the FCC from Preempting States’ Rules, Remands Key Issues to the Agency n Oct. 1, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. general and the attorney general of Washington, D.C., as well as Circuit released a per curiam opinion upholding multiple technology and internet companies. The lawsuits were the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) consolidated into one case on March 12, 2018. Meanwhile, on December 2017 repeal of the net neutrality rules, Nov. 5, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari to review holding that the FCC had the authority to do so and an earlier challenge to the FCC’s authority to implement net Othat the agency had been reasonable in its approach. Mozilla neutrality rules. U.S. Telecom Assoc. v. Fed. Comm. Comm’n, Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission, 940 F.3d 1 825 F.3d 674 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (cert. denied), 139 S. Ct. 454 (2018). (D.C. Cir. 2019). However, the court vacated the portion of the Additionally, several states took different actions related to repeal that would have allowed the FCC to prohibit states from net neutrality. For example, on Sept. 30, 2018, California Gov. drafting their own net neutrality regulations. The D.C. Circuit Jerry Brown signed into law SB 822, the “California Internet also remanded several issues to the FCC, including requiring the Consumer Protection and Net Neutrality Act of 2018,” which agency to assess the rollback’s effect on public safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Nominee Report: First Look
    Supreme Court Nominee Report: First Look Brett ALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE ALLIANCE FOR Kavanaugh WWW.AFJ.ORG CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, 1 HEALTH CARE, 2 Reproductive Rights, 3 Presidential Power, 5 Consumer Rights, 7 ENVIRONMENT, 8 WORKERS’ RIGHTS, 9 CIVIL RIGHTS, 10 GUN Violence, 12 IMMIGRATION, 12 NATIONAL SECURITY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES, 13 CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 15 Conclusion, 16 WWW.AFJ.ORG PAGE 1 would show the independence of thought necessary for a seat” as a EXECUTIVE federal judge.1 It took three years for Kavanaugh, a SUMMARY highly partisan and controversial nominee, to be confirmed to the D.C. On June 27, 2018, Justice Anthony Circuit seat. Prior to his nomination, Kennedy announced his intention to Kavanaugh’s career as a partisan retire from the U.S. Supreme Court on political operative blossomed. He July 31. The announcement created an worked for Republicans on the election opportunity for President Donald Trump recount at the heart of the Bush v. Gore to make a second appointment to the case;2 helped with the investigation of high court following the appointment of President Bill Clinton’s relationship with Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017, and to Monica Lewinsky;3 drafted grounds for cement a 5-4 conservative majority on President Clinton’s impeachment with the Court for decades to come. The Independent Counsel Ken Starr;4 led stakes for the Court and for the nation the independent counsel’s were immediately thrown into sharp investigation into the alleged murder of relief: the future of access to health care, Vince Foster;5 and served as a lawyer for to reproductive rights, and to civil rights Jeb Bush.6 that had been gradually won over many decades are clearly in jeopardy.
    [Show full text]
  • During the US Supreme Court's October Term (OT) 2018
    GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER Office Memorandum DATE: JUNE 13, 2019 TO: GEORGETOWN LAW FACULTY AND STAFF FROM: DORI BERNSTEIN, IRV GORNSTEIN, STEVEN GOLDBLATT, SARAH NAIMAN RE: SUPREME COURT INSTITUTE ANNUAL REPORT Executive Summary: During the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2018 – corresponding to the 2018- 2019 academic year –the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 99% of the cases heard by the Supreme Court, offered a variety of programs related to the Supreme Court, and continued RtoEPORT integrateADDENDUM the moot courtTO SCI program FY2013 into BUDGET the education of Georgetown Law students. The varied affiliations of advocates mooted this Term reflect SCI’s firm commitment to provide assist ance to advocates without regard to the party represented or the position advanced. A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2018 – arranged by argument sitting and moot court date, and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of observers – follows the narrative portion of this report. Some facts and figures about SCI moot courts this Term appear immediately below (comparable figures from the past eight Terms, OT 2010 through OT 2017, appear in brackets): OT 2018 SCI Moot Court Statistics MOOTS: Total Number of Moots: 72 moots [OT 2017: 63 moots] [OT 2016: 65 moots] [OT 2015: 68 moots] [OT 2014: 69 moots] [OT 2013: 67 moots] [OT 2012: 78 moots] [OT 2011: 68 moots] [OT 2010: 73 moots] ________________________ 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 % of Arguments Mooted:
    [Show full text]
  • Decision Making in Us Federal Specialized
    THE CONSEQUENCES OF SPECIALIZATION: DECISION MAKING IN U.S. FEDERAL SPECIALIZED COURTS Ryan J. Williams A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Kevin T. McGuire Isaac Unah Jason M. Roberts Virginia Gray Brett W. Curry © 2019 Ryan J. Williams ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Ryan J. Williams: The Consequences of Specialization: Decision Making in U.S. Federal Specialized Courts (Under the direction of Kevin T. McGuire) Political scientists have devoted little attention to the role of specialized courts in the United States federal and state judicial systems. At the federal level, theories of judicial decision making and institutional structures widely accepted in discussions of the U.S. Supreme Court and other generalist courts (the federal courts of appeals and district courts) have seen little examination in the context of specialized courts. In particular, scholars are just beginning to untangle the relationship between judicial expertise and decision making, as well as to understand how specialized courts interact with the bureaucratic agencies they review and the litigants who appear before them. In this dissertation, I examine the consequences of specialization in the federal judiciary. The first chapter introduces the landscape of existing federal specialized courts. The second chapter investigates the patterns of recent appointments to specialized courts, focusing specifically on how the qualifications of specialized court judges compare to those of generalists. The third chapter considers the role of expertise in a specialized court, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and argues that expertise enhances the ability for judges to apply their ideologies to complex, technical cases.
    [Show full text]