Supreme Court Rulings Research Articles

Theorizing ‘religion’ in Canadian law

With primary reference to two Supreme Court rulings – Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem ([2004] 2 SCR 551) and Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations) ([2017] 2 SCR 386) – the focal points of this study are twofold. In the first part, the authors analyse Amselem’s definition of religion with reference to concepts and theories that have a well-entrenched place in the field of religious studies. They contend that even as Amselem frames religion as an ontological entity, the Court’s definition is best understood as a particular type of social construct – namely, an ‘ethno-definition’ that is polythetic in approach. Segueing from a discussion of Amselem, the second part of this study concerns the issue of why – or perhaps whether – the Amselem articulation of religion remains relevant. In this regard, it is argued that there is a palpable transition between Amselem and Ktunaxa in terms of how the Supreme Court analyses the concepts of religion and religious freedom under the Charter.

Under The Law: The incredibly shrinking zone of teacher free speech

Schools, districts, and states are able to place some limits on what teachers can and cannot teach, but what of teachers’ free speech rights outside the classroom? Robert Kim examines long-standing U.S. Supreme Court rulings regarding free speech in school and considers how they might apply specifically to teachers’ free speech rights. He then surveys some recent district courts cases in which teachers were penalized for speech inside and outside the classroom. These cases suggest that it’s time to reexamine the role of teachers as representatives of the state.

Reclarification on Whether Taiwan Depositary Receipt Has Been Approved as Securities in Taiwan─A Judicial Practice Analysis on the Supreme Court Ruling No. 105 Tai-Kang 70, 107 Tai-Shang 3170, and 111 Tai-Kang 537

Reclarification on Whether Taiwan Depositary Receipt Has Been Approved as Securities in Taiwan─A Judicial Practice Analysis on the Supreme Court Ruling No. 105 Tai-Kang 70, 107 Tai-Shang 3170, and 111 Tai-Kang 537

Refreshing the Tree of Liberty: An Introduction to the Case Against Gun Control

This paper analyzes the Second Amendment regarding whether or not it affirms an individual the right to own firearms by looking at previous Supreme Court rulings and the historical context in which the Second Amendment was written: coming to the conclusion that it does support an individual’s right to bear arms. Gun control measures, including but not limited to assault weapon bans, red-flag laws, and licensing, are reviewed by looking at how the policies work and what the effects of each are. The data on these measures were ultimately found to have no conclusive evidence supporting an inverse relationship between gun control measures and violent crime. Ethical concerns relating to gun control measures were analyzed by establishing an ethical framework of natural rights. This framework leads to the conclusion that gun control measures such as assault weapons bans, red-flag laws, and licensing are unethical on the grounds of violating natural rights. This paper also looks at the effectiveness of bans and restrictions advocated by gun control advoactes and compares them to bans and restrictions that were previously and or currently in effect in American history. Concerns on gun policy such as public safety, the defensive usage of firearms, and common arguments for gun control are analyzed and critiqued in this paper.

The American public's attitudes over how judges use legal principles to make decisions

Abstract We investigate the American public's attitudes over an integral component of judicial behavior: the legal principles judges employ when making decisions. Our theoretical perspective argues that political preferences shape individuals’ attitudes over how judges apply legal principles, mirroring ideological divisions expressed by political elites and judges. Using an original battery of questions, we find high support across all Americans for the use of certain, well-established legal principles, but stark differences in how liberals and conservatives evaluate the use of more controversial principles. In a survey experiment, we find that agreement (disagreement) between an individual's attitudes over the use of legal principles and the reasoning contained in a Supreme Court opinion is associated with increased (decreased) support for the Court decision.

Supreme Court Rules on the Use of Comparables Involving Different Functional Profiles

In a recent decision of 15 June 2023, the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic upheld the position of the taxpayer in a case dealing with the comparability of transactions involving different functional profiles of the same taxpayer due to a business restructuring arrangement. In the view of the Supreme Court, the tax administration failed to establish what would have been an arm’s length price in a comparable uncontrolled transaction by choosing a single uncontrolled transaction, which, in the view of the taxpayer and the Court, was not comparable to what the actual controlled transaction was.

Writing History in a Supreme Court Ruling: Evaluative language in the majority opinion concerning Dobbs vs. Jackson

This paper conducts an exploratory investigation into the use of evaluative language in the historical section of the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. (2022). The investigation employs Martin & White’s (2005) Appraisal Theory, adapted specifically for the analysis of the particular evaluative features of historical discourse as elaborated on, for example, by Myskow (2018a) and Oteíza & Pinuer (2013). The findings confirm that a revised version of the Appraisal framework can be fruitfully applied to systematically account for the complex interplay between, on the one hand, the various sources of evaluation, and, on the other hand, the specific attitudinal resources, employed by the authorial voice in an attempt to construe and advance a particular view of the past. This particular ideological view is ultimately leveraged to produce a convincing justificatory argument for the overruling of the two previous landmark Supreme Court decisions that had, respectively, granted and confirmed abortion as a constitutional right in the United States of America.

Would Justice Be Better Served in the U.S. if More Supreme Court Judges Were Women?

This paper support that justice would be better served in the U.S. if Supreme Court judges included more women. Considering the powerful influence of the Supreme Court rulings, this paper focuses on the importance of diversity on the bench and females decision-making characteristics. Diversity on the bench could effectively enhance the fairness of verdicts and positively influence colleagues, as female judges would make decisions with different life experiences. Their presence creates a more fair and open courtroom environment. Also, a diverse bench would increase confidence in U.S. citizens of the Supreme Court. Compared to males, Females decision-making characteristics would provide a fresh perspective on the bench since these characteristics are essential and beneficial for courtroom decisions.

The proper subject as a prerequisite for the admissibility of evidence: court practice

The article is devoted to certain issues of admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings, taking into account judicial practice accordingly. The notes emphasizes one of the most important issues in criminal proceedings is the issue of obtaining evidence by the proper subjects. At the same time, in the spotlight when deciding on the admissibility of evidence, should be the rights and freedoms of citizens.
 Based on the Supreme Court litigation and the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights, the article allocates a number of problematic aspects that arise in practical work, as a result, leads to the recognition an evidence as inadmissible due to their receipt by improper subject of proof.
 Since the decision of a court or international judicial institution that has entered into force and establishes a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine and international treaties ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is of prejudicial importance for the court that decides on the admissibility of evidence, the Supreme Court’s practice on these issues is undoubtedly subject to study, detailed analysis and further application in practice.
 Only on the basis of evidentiary information are the subjects of criminal proceedings authorized to make procedural decisions regarding criminal law conflict and ensuring human rights and freedoms.
 The investigator, prosecutor, and investigating judge evaluate the evidence already collected and verified during the pre-trial investigation when making relevant procedural decisions. Of course, the evaluation of evidence by the court during the trial is of great importance, since it is the court that decides on the guilt or innocence of a person in committing a criminal offense when passing a verdict.
 The author concludes that investigators, procedural supervisors, and investigating judges should take into account the legal positions of the Supreme Court in their activities and prevent the violations pointed out by the author in this article with reference to the Supreme Court rulings.

Perez v. Sturgis Public School (2023): The Supreme Court Rules on the Special Education Exhaustion Requirement

The U.S. Supreme Court has heard several cases regarding special education. These cases have resulted in decisions that have addressed issues involving special education programming and procedural issues. On March 21, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools. This decision, which was the most recent special education case heard by the highest court in the United States, involved litigation in special education. In this brief article, we address the Supreme Court’s decision in Perez by (a) examining the background of the case, (b) reviewing the decision by the lower courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, and (c) discussing the implications of the case for special educators.

K–12 Schools in Ohio Are Separate and Unequal

Schools are one of the main determinants of lifetime employment and wages. In the 1950s and 60s, many Black leaders were concerned that Supreme Court rulings outlawing the racial segregation of schools might not effectively eliminate school segregation. This Economic Commentary uses data from Ohio to show that, even today, Black and white students attend largely separate K–12 schools that provide unequal educational opportunity.

The implementation and effectiveness of Indonesian Supreme Court Rule No. 3 of 2017 on women victims of the sexual violence in Yogyakarta

PERMA (Supreme Court Rule) No. 3 of 2017 issued by the Supreme Court regulates the attitude guidelines for judges in adjudicating women's cases in conflict with the law, both criminal and civil cases involving women as victims, witnesses, or parties. These regulations can be used as a legal basis by judges in adjudicating cases of women in conflict with the law due to criminal acts of sexual violence. This research aims to determine the effectiveness of implementing PERMA No. 3 of 2017 concerning guidelines for adjudicating cases of women in conflict with the law as a result of victims of sexual violence at the Yogyakarta District Court. The method used in this research is empirical normative, which focuses on collecting information obtained from judges at the Yogyakarta District Court regarding the effectiveness of PERMA No. 3 of 2017 against women as a result of victims of sexual violence. The approach methods that the author uses in this research include the conceptual approach, the statutory approach, and the case approach. The data collection method is through interviews and documentation of judges, and the data analysis used is descriptive-qualitative. This research concludes that PERMA No. 3 of 2017 has been quite effective in accordance with the theory of legal effectiveness, which uses several a quo decisions as samples to determine whether PERMA No. 3 of 2017 has been applied and implemented in the Yogyakarta District Court for women victims of sexual violence.

Unpacking Public Health Implications of the 2023 Supreme Court Ruling on Race-Conscious Admissions.

Unpacking Public Health Implications of the 2023 Supreme Court Ruling on Race-Conscious Admissions.

Unfair Employee and Abuse of Rights: the Supreme Court's Vision

Unfairness in law in general and abuse of law in particular is a topic that has its roots in Roman law. Unfortunately, this negative social and legal phenomenon cannot be overcome but its manifestations can be minimized, which is facilitated by high-quality legislation and court decisions that suppress specific cases of unfairness and abuse of rights. In our opinion, labor and legal research pays insufficient attention to these issues, or remains at the level of theoretical discourse. The author did not set out to comprehensively cover this topic, but only to draw attention to its existence and importance once again, and to undermine the dominant thesis in labor law and judicial practice about the «sanctity» of the employee and the presumption of unfairness of the employee, since he is the «stronger» party. This approach is firmly rooted in both theory and practice and has its origins in the class theory of the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In modern conditions, it is necessary to talk about the common interest of the parties to an employment contract, the search for a compromise, and good faith towards each other, but definitely not about confrontation. The analysis of the Supreme Court's practice is very important for the further development of research in the field of abuse of rights. This is because the Supreme Court's decisions are quasi-precedents. Thus, these decisions must be followed by lower courts and the Supreme Court's practice actually fills in the gaps in labor legislation. In addition, the generalization of practice can become a reliable source for recodification of labor legislation in the future. The article analyzes the controversial issue of law enforcement. An example of a Supreme Court decision is given, which, in the author's opinion, carries the risk of legalizing the abuse of rights. The author provides counter-arguments that demonstrate the controversial nature of the Supreme Court's legal opinion. Key words: Unfair Employee, Abuse of Rights, labor disputes

Lower Court Influence on High Courts: Evidence from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

AbstractDo lower court judges influence the content of Supreme Court opinions in the United Kingdom? Leveraging original data, we analyze opinion language adoption practices of the UK Supreme Court. We advance a theory where the justices’ choices to adopt language from lower court opinions are influenced by Supreme Court-level attributes and Court of Appeal case characteristics. We uncover compelling evidence that UK Supreme Court justices incorporate language extensively from the written opinions of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. Our findings have significant implications for opinion formulation, doctrinal development, and higher and lower court interactions within comparative courts.

The US Supreme Court and Affirmative Action: The Negative Impact on the Physician Workforce

PurposeMaintaining admissions of underrepresented students to medical schools is essential to securing a diverse health care workforce. Empirical evidence indicates that minority patients may prefer practitioners of their own race. The recent US Supreme Court decision concerning affirmative action makes this goal more difficult, but medical schools can still work within the language of the law to redouble their efforts to seat a diverse class of medical students. MethodsWe examined the literature correlating the availability of minority physicians and the health outcomes of the patients they serve. We also examined the literature on race-conscious policies of medical schools intended to address the shortage of minority physicians considering the benefits achieved through a diverse field of health care workers. We also examined the law and the recent US Supreme Court opinion, including the application of equal protection principles, to suggest strategies to seat a diverse class of students within the scope of the law. FindingsInstitutions have maintained the status quo of disparate distributions of professions by race through structural biases that also limit access to medical schools. The new US Supreme Court decision is expected to exacerbate this disparity unless medical schools engage in admissions protocols that actively solicit the character and unique abilities that each of the applicants can offer to contribute to the medical school and the health care profession. ImplicationsThe new US Supreme Court mandate is likely to create challenges for medical schools in their efforts to recruit and seat minority applicants. The mandate provides little discussion, suggesting a lack of understanding of the downstream public health consequences to patients if medical school applicants are denied the benefits of race-conscious admissions policies. Nevertheless, the language of the US Supreme Court's opinion may provide a viable path forward, at least with respect to medical schools where the need for a diverse pool of health care practitioners is particularly compelling.

Navigating entangled terrain: The Supreme Court's impact and the dismissal powers of human rights tribunals

AbstractThe human rights justice system is a politically and legally complex area to navigate with legislative changes and judicial decisions shaping the administration and governance of human rights policies. This article provides a comprehensive examination of the complexities and intricacies of this system by measuring the impact of judicial rulings on the discretionary decision‐making of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal (HRTO). The impact of the Supreme Court of Canada's relevant jurisprudence in Figliola and Penner on the HRTO's discretionary powers to dismiss claims pursuant to section 45.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code is measured by examining the outcomes of decisions made by the Tribunal. The article presents new empirical data on all early dismissal decisions (N = 1479) from 2008 to 2021 and demonstrates the effects of the Supreme Court's rulings in Figliola and Penner. The findings in this article reveal that both Figliola and Penner had significant impacts on the Tribunal's discretionary decision‐making powers.

Israeli Democracy and its System of Checks and Balances: The Testimony Derived from Two Supreme Court Opinions by President Asher Grunis

ABSTRACT: This essay examines two separate but related cases in which President Asher Grunis of the Israeli High Court of Justice wrote opinions that overturned two decisions made by the Central Elections Committee of the Knesset. The first decision disqualified Balad party MK Haneen Zoabi from running for office while the second censored advertisements by both the Arab Party Balad and the right-wing Jewish Party Otzma l'Yisrael during the 2012 election campaign. The substance of these decisions speaks to the commitment Grunis and the Court had to the principles of liberal democracy. The opinions also testify to the power the Supreme Court possesses to protect the civil rights of candidacy and free speech and assure equal rights for culturally, religiously, and politically marginalized groups. The views expressed in them are particularly relevant at a moment when the system of checks and balances that have historically defined Israel as a liberal democratic nation is endangered by proposed legislation.

Israeli Democracy and its System of Checks and Balances: The Testimony Derived from Two Supreme Court Opinions by President Asher Grunis

ABSTRACT: This essay examines two separate but related cases in which President Asher Grunis of the Israeli High Court of Justice wrote opinions that overturned two decisions made by the Central Elections Committee of the Knesset. The first decision disqualified Balad party MK Haneen Zoabi from running for office while the second censored advertisements by both the Arab Party Balad and the right-wing Jewish Party Otzma l'Yisrael during the 2012 election campaign. The substance of these decisions speaks to the commitment Grunis and the Court had to the principles of liberal democracy. The opinions also testify to the power the Supreme Court possesses to protect the civil rights of candidacy and free speech and assure equal rights for culturally, religiously, and politically marginalized groups. The views expressed in them are particularly relevant at a moment when the system of checks and balances that have historically defined Israel as a liberal democratic nation is endangered by proposed legislation.

VIRTUAL MEDIATION IN DIVORCE CASES AT UJUNG TANJUNG RELIGIOUS COURT

The mediation process was initially carried out outside the court institution (non-litigation) for the parties to the dispute, but with the times and changes in behavior, a mediation process was made in court that was inseparable from the court institution (litigation). The mediation process is an obligation that must be carried out by the judge before carrying out the next trial. If you look at PERMA No. 1 of 2016, there are many advantages why mediation is used in court. The purpose of this study is to understand the problems faced in virtual mediation at the Ujung Tanjung Religious Court and describe the efforts made by law enforcement of the Ujung Tanjung Religious Court in handling virtual mediation problems in terms of the effectiveness of Soerjono Soekanto. qualitative approach. The conclusion of this study is that the low success of the community itself is that not all parties in this case use the services of advocates, and the average level of education of the parties is low. The Ujung Tanjung Religious Court in carrying out its duties and functions has carried out a mediation process based on PERMA No.1 of 2016, the results of the litigants in conducting the mediation process are still low and the parties' strong desire to divorce. The Ujung Tanjung Religious Court has made efforts to resolve the issue, but it still requires awareness and responsibility. The online mediation process itself if referring to the Supreme Court Rules, the process can be done using audio-visual media such as video calls that are already available in many applications. In other words, the role or function of this paper is expected to be able to be a social construction to find the level of effectiveness of mediation in divorce cases in religious courts.