Onze site gebruikt cookies om diensten te leveren, prestaties te verbeteren, voor analyse en (indien je niet ingelogd bent) voor advertenties. Door LibraryThing te gebruiken erken je dat je onze Servicevoorwaarden en Privacybeleid gelezen en begrepen hebt. Je gebruik van de site en diensten is onderhevig aan dit beleid en deze voorwaarden.
At 11:34 PM on April 9, 2021, the Supreme Court issued an emergency ruling. California governor Gavin Newsom's bid to enact enhanced COVID restrictions was overturned in a sweeping redefinition of existing law. The shadowy circumstances of this ruling-an unsigned decision made in just a few pages, without a full briefing, and in the middle of the night-are not typical of the Supreme Court. But, as legal scholar and expert Stephen Vladeck shows, they're becoming far too common. The Supreme Court has always had the authority to issue emergency rulings-halting an execution or preventing a law from going into effect until lower courts could rule on its constitutionality-but until recently, it did so only in exceptional circumstances and issued only narrow rulings. Yet in the past decade, the court has expanded its use of the behind-the-scenes "shadow docket" dramatically, handing down major decisions that impact millions of Americans without oral argument or signed opinions, and often without any legal reasoning at all. While typical cases take years, shadow docket cases can take weeks. They typically fly under the public radar, too-until now. In The Shadow Docket, University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck offers a comprehensive analysis of the shadow docket, tracing its emergence in the 1970s in the wake of major court decisions on the death penalty and its recent embrace by a conservative-leaning court that has expanded it to set policy on everything from election law to abortion to immigration. Yet while Republican appointees have been most enthusiastic in their use of the shadow docket, the docket itself is not partisan, and Vladeck makes the case that Americans of all political stripes have a stake in bringing the court's decision-making processes back into the light. Rigorous yet accessible, The Shadow Docket exposes a disturbing institutional crisis that threatens the foundations of our democracy, and calls for sweeping reform.… (meer)
Informatie afkomstig uit de Engelse Algemene Kennis.Bewerk om naar jouw taal over te brengen.
For Nasser Hussain, who opened the door, and for Karen, Maddie, and Sydney, who keep it open
Eerste woorden
Informatie afkomstig uit de Engelse Algemene Kennis.Bewerk om naar jouw taal over te brengen.
History books will teach that the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to abortion on June 24, 2022. -Preface
On the morning of August 2, 1973, from his summer cottage in Goose Prairie, Washing, Justice William O. Doulas set in motion one of the strangest proceedings in the history of the United States Supreme Court. -Introduction
All his life, William Howard Taft aspired to one job, and it wasn't the presidency. -Chapter 1, The Rise of Certiorari
Citaten
Laatste woorden
Informatie afkomstig uit de Engelse Algemene Kennis.Bewerk om naar jouw taal over te brengen.
That is why it is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to bring more and more of its work out of the shadows - and upon all of us to understand the increasingly grave implications for our Republic if and when it does not.
At 11:34 PM on April 9, 2021, the Supreme Court issued an emergency ruling. California governor Gavin Newsom's bid to enact enhanced COVID restrictions was overturned in a sweeping redefinition of existing law. The shadowy circumstances of this ruling-an unsigned decision made in just a few pages, without a full briefing, and in the middle of the night-are not typical of the Supreme Court. But, as legal scholar and expert Stephen Vladeck shows, they're becoming far too common. The Supreme Court has always had the authority to issue emergency rulings-halting an execution or preventing a law from going into effect until lower courts could rule on its constitutionality-but until recently, it did so only in exceptional circumstances and issued only narrow rulings. Yet in the past decade, the court has expanded its use of the behind-the-scenes "shadow docket" dramatically, handing down major decisions that impact millions of Americans without oral argument or signed opinions, and often without any legal reasoning at all. While typical cases take years, shadow docket cases can take weeks. They typically fly under the public radar, too-until now. In The Shadow Docket, University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck offers a comprehensive analysis of the shadow docket, tracing its emergence in the 1970s in the wake of major court decisions on the death penalty and its recent embrace by a conservative-leaning court that has expanded it to set policy on everything from election law to abortion to immigration. Yet while Republican appointees have been most enthusiastic in their use of the shadow docket, the docket itself is not partisan, and Vladeck makes the case that Americans of all political stripes have a stake in bringing the court's decision-making processes back into the light. Rigorous yet accessible, The Shadow Docket exposes a disturbing institutional crisis that threatens the foundations of our democracy, and calls for sweeping reform.