Supreme Court Rulings Research Articles

Argentine Supreme Court Rules That Source Protection Prevails over Prices Obtained in Normal Market Practices between Independent Parties

This article discusses the judgment of the Argentine Supreme Court in the 2021 Nidera case.

Epistemological stance and passive reporting verbs in judicial opinions: the case of BE expected to and BE supposed to

Abstract This study examines the discourse functions of BE expected to and BE supposed to in the genre of judicial opinion, providing insights into discipline-specific practices of epistemological positioning. Drawing on the 130 million words Corpus of US Supreme Court Opinions, it looks at how the two mindsay constructions were deployed in judicial writing over a period of more than 200 years, and identifies divergent frequency patterns associated with their use. As the findings reveal, in the opinions, on the one hand, BE expected to tends to co-occur with reasonably (can/could (not) reasonably be expected to) and is used to create a semblance of objectivity. BE supposed to, on the other hand, favors the present tense and third-person reference (which/it is supposed to) and serves as a distancing device. The paper also compares the frequency patterns involving BE expected to and BE supposed to found in the opinions with those attested in the Corpus of Historical American English, and it demonstrates that judicial writing exhibits trends which clearly differ from trends noted in non-judicial registers.

Legacies of War: Violence, Ecologies, and Kin by Kimberly Theidon

Reviewed by: Legacies of War: Violence, Ecologies, and Kin by Kimberly Theidon Diana Pardo Pedraza Theidon, Kimberly. Legacies of War: Violence, Ecologies, and Kin. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 2022. 114 pp. On February 21, 2022, the Colombian Constitutional Court decriminalized abortion within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy. This ruling is part of a vital wave of activism for greater reproductive rights in Latin America. The Colombian case follows important victories for the right to decide in Mexico (in the state of Coahuila, to be specific) and in Argentina, where abortion has been legalized for up to 14 weeks of pregnancy. In contrast to this reality are the recent Supreme Court opinion that overturned Roe v. Wade—the 1973 Court landmark decision that made access to safe and legal abortion a constitutional right—and the latest measures toward a near-total abortion ban by more than a dozen U.S. states, including Idaho, Texas, and Tennessee. These recent legal decisions have reignited crucial debates on reproductive justice, defined as the right to bodily autonomy—to decide whether to have children and raise them in a healthy, safe, and sustainable environment. As feminist activists have reminded us, these measures have historically, widely, and disproportionately impacted poor women and women of color, who experience more significant economic and logistical complications in accessing abortion, even in spaces where it is legal or regulated. This is the landscape of reproductive rights in the Americas that informed my reading of Kimberly Theidon's latest book, Legacies of War: Violence, Ecologies, and Kin, in which the anthropologist considers the "multiple environments in which conception, pregnancy, and childbirth unfold" (7) in times of war and postwar. A feminist ethnography of post-conflict based on three decades of fieldwork in Peru and Colombia, two countries embroiled in long-running internal armed conflicts, the book [End Page 915] explores the silenced and neglected outcomes of rape and sexual violence, the so-called "children born of war," and what these challenging conceptions may reveal about intergenerational and more-than-human markers and impacts of warfare. Through intriguing conceptual images such as "living legacies," "violent conceptions," and "situated biologies," Theidon offers a vocabulary for thinking about the harm caused by forced gestations, imposed parenthood, and toxic reproductive environments, highlighting the need for a framework of justice that attends to the different experiences, memories, and reproductive desires of women and moves beyond human exceptionalism. Building on a growing literature on the material and symbolic consequences of armed conflict in anthropology, feminist studies, and environmental humanities, Legacies of War contributes to a gendered theory of harm and reparation (for other studies on these issues, see Sánchez Parra and Lo Iacono 2020; Sánchez Parra 2018). The book draws attention to the competing rights regimes for children conceived in rape and their mothers, the oppressive weight of hegemonic maternal scripts and patriarchal biological and legal systems, and how warfare shapes and marks our more-than-human kin. Theidon's feminist and posthumanist analysis of violent circumstances of conception and childbearing in (post)war draws on Michelle Murphy's (2013) concept of "distributed reproduction." While Murphy is concerned with the diffuse spatial and temporal pathways of industrial chemicals that alter the reproduction of human and more-than-human lives, Theidon considers the harm and toxicity (re)produced by armed conflict in bodies, kinship networks, and rural landscapes. This distributed approach to reproduction, Theidon asserts, could help reduce "the efforts to govern maternal bodies" (81), as it attunes us instead to "the structural forces that shape reproductive outcomes" (81). It also "opens up the possibility of a politics of accountability and coexistence that is not grounded in an anthropocentric rights framework" (94). Theidon's gendered analysis of the human and more-than-human impacts of war and postwar places her manuscript in conversation with contemporary scholarship in anthropology interested in thinking about 1) the role of the ordinary and practices of care in the maintenance and interruption of cycles and repertoires of violence (Berman-Arévalo and Ojeda 2020, Terry 2017, Wool 2015, Das 2007), 2) the participation of natural environments in social and armed conflicts (Gordillo 2018, Kim 2017, Guarasci 2015, de Le...

Culture Wars & Corporate Dilemmas

Worldwide, more than 25 million unsafe abortions are still performed each year, making it the third leading cause of maternal death in the world.”∗ Corporations find themselves navigating an increasingly complicated web of social issues as they respond to recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

Abortion Is Only the Beginning

Abortion Is Only the Beginning

Publications of the Identity of Children in Conflict with the Law on the Official Site of the Indonesian Supreme Court Decision Directory

Protection of children's rights in conflict with the law (ABH) is a state obligation. The protection aims to ensure the best interests of the child and to prevent discrimination. As stated in Article 19 of Law Number 11 of 2012, one of the rights is that law enforcement institutions are not allowed to publish the identities of ABH, either in print/ electronic media. However, their identities are still revealed in various Decisions of children's cases. Particularly, their identity is published on the Site of the Supreme Court's Ruling Directory. The purpose of this study is to find out why the Supreme Court Decision Directory Site does not keep the identity of ABH a secret and what are the implications. This research used a socio-legal approach. The results of the study show the management team did not understand their main tasks and rules of protecting the identity of ABH, inconsistency in checking copies of court decisions, ineffective monitoring, and only a handful of people reported the case so this situation is considered normal. The implications of the children’s identity disclosure have affected the rights of children, families, and applicable rules that do not provide legal certainty.

Some observations regarding the law-making nature of the Supreme Court of Ukraine’s opinions on application of law

Having examined the legal properties of legal opinions of the Supreme Court of Ukraine embodied in provisions of Ukrainian law in view of the concept asserting the law-making orientation of the legal opinions of the Supreme Court as well as in view of the concept stating that all the outcomes of judicial application of law only specify and individualize law without changing or repealing any existing legal norms, the author concludes that at the moment, despite the proximity of legal opinions to the legal norms in terms of their universally binding nature and their establishment of rules of conduct beyond the literal reproduction of the relevant legislation, a more convincing scientific justification has the thought that the legal opinions of the Supreme Court of Ukraine only set out the results of interpretation of legal norms and determine the way to specify its meaning to the extent necessary to determine the rights and duties of parties to particular relationships based on their individual features. It is noted that there is no reason to state categorically that, having determined the pattern of correct application of law, the Supreme Court of Ukraine filled it with a completely new meaning, which does not follow from this or other rules of law. The author argues that the formation of a completely new legal rule by the Supreme Court is impossible, given that there are no phenomena that have legal significance and are not covered by the legal rules and regulations, at least, by the most abstract legal instruments. Moreover, the law-making nature of the Supreme Court's legal opinions is not substantiated by the fact that they are officially recognized as derived from legal norms, the proper application of which they determine, while the rule of law is always the primary legal regulator and has no external source of legal force. It should also be taken into account that the legal opinion of the Supreme Court cannot be a self-sufficient legal basis for resolving the issue of law.

The Impact and Evidentiary Value of DNA Technology in Paternity Disputes with Special Reference to Pakistan & India

This paper underlines that DNA technology is globally considered a useful and effective forensic tool in paternity disputes and obtaining scientific accuracy. More significantly, the judges and the superior courts of developing countries have relied on the evidentiary value of DNA testing. Nonetheless, they have expressed significant hesitation in approving DNA tests or accepting DNA evidence in some cases, citing legal or constitutional prohibitions as justifications. Because there is a lack of clear policies and efficient procedures, legality of DNA technology is generally determined by judicial discretion. However, contrasting Supreme Court rulings in Pakistan and India have caused doubt and misunderstanding concerning the significance of DNA evidence is used in civil and criminal matters. In addition, it contains best possible legislative reforms by applying DNA technology as a forensic tool to address the prevailing paternity issues and the identification of offenders.

Judges' Legal Culture in Dealing with High Number of Applications for Child Marriage Dispensation during Covid-19 Pandemic at the Kudus Religious Court

This study aims to explore the judges' legal culture in the Kudus Religious Courts in dealing with the high number of applications for marriage dispensation during the Covid-19 pandemic. Making a decision on a case becomes problematic for judges because they have to make it on their personal considerations. This research was analyzed qualitatively using a constructivism paradigm with a socio-legal research approach based on primary data by interviewing 2 (two) judges, 3 (three) advocates, and 3 (three) applicants for a marriage dispensation. Moreover, it also employed secondary data, including the marriage law, marriage regulation and its implementation, relevant literature, and academic journals. The research findings are: First, the high number was caused by Kudus people’s perception of the minimum legal age of marriage which is based on customary belief, which is maturity in social life, rather than legal regulation which is numerical age. Second, in making a decision about the case, the judges make considerations based on legal facts in the trial court and the values of justice living in the society while paying attention to the Supreme Court rules. Third, the legal culture of judges in deciding the application is making dialogue with some fellow judges while advising applicants to revoke their application.

The Leaked Supreme Court Ruling Opinion

This Viewpoint examines the ramifications of the US Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade, including limitations on abortion access, legal consequences, financial consequences, and the erosion of personal rights particularly for marginalized and underserved populations.

US Supreme Court rules that unintentional mistakes of law, like mistakes of fact, may be considered under the copyright registration safe harbour provision

Abstract On 24 February 2002, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Unicolors, Inc. v H&M Hennes & Mauritz, LP, holding that an unintentional mistake of law is entitled to the benefit of the US Copyright Act’s safe harbour provision, § 411(b)(1)(A). In so doing, the Court clarified that not only unintentional mistakes of fact made during the application process, but also unintentional mistakes of law may be evaluated under the US Copyright Act’s safe harbour provision.

Harper and Its Aftermath

In Davis v. Michigan Department of Treasury, the Supreme Court ruled that states may not tax the pensions of former federal workers without imposing a like tax on the retirement income of former state employees. Noting that Michigan had agreed to refund the state income taxes Paul Davis had paid on his federal pension over the years in controversy, the Court stated that he was entitled to a refund. It then remanded the case to allow the Michigan courts and state lawmakers to determine how state and federal retirees were to be treated equally in the future-both taxed according to the same schedule or exempted from tax-and to resolve the thousands of refund claims by federal pensioners that had been or might be filed.Davis provoked a whirlwind of activity in state courts and legislatures across the country, because two dozen states taxed state retirement income more lightly than federal pensions, contrary to the Supreme Court's understanding of the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity. Davis left no doubt that states must equalize the taxation of federal and state retirees following the issuance of the Court's opinion. But the Court's bare mention of Michigan's concession to refund Davis's taxes failed to answer clearly the question of whether states owed some form of retroactive relief to all similarly situated federal retirees who had paid higher taxes than had state pensioners. Not surprisingly, in view of the number of courts that issued rulings, the enormous sums at stake, and the confusion swirling around the Supreme Court's recent retroactivity rulings, state courts disagreed over whether the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause mandates a remedy for past wrongs. Many, including Virginia's Supreme Court, concluded that Davis established a requirement of equal treatment solely for the future. Accordingly, they refused to order refunds to federal retirees or to impose a retroactive tax on state pensions to secure equality after the fact.

Rights, Mini-Publics, and Judicial Review

AbstractLandmark Supreme Court rulings determine American law by adjudicating among competing reasonable interpretations of basic political rights. Jeremy Waldron argues that this practice is democratically illegitimate because what determines the content of basic rights is a bare majority vote of an unelected, democratically unaccountable, elitist body of nine judges. I argue that Waldron's democratic critique of judicial review has implications for real-world reform, but not the implications he thinks it has. He argues that systems of legislative supremacy over the judiciary are democratically preferable to the American one. I provide reasons why his argument is unsound and explain that, properly construed, Waldron's premises support implementing a system where ordinary citizens chosen by lottery participate in a deliberative mini-public to vote on which reasonable interpretation of a basic political right will become the law of the land.

The Ethics of Capital Punishment and a Law of Affective Enchantment

This paper re-reads American Appellate and Supreme Court rulings about the constitutionality of execution by electrocution from the perspective of new materialism. Using the case of Provenzano v. Moore, this paper highlights how the existing jurisprudence develops a notion of cruelty that deliberately avoids the sensual and affective dimensions of punishment. Given the profoundly corporeal nature of punishment and even more so capital punishment, any consideration of the ethics of punitive practice must meaningfully engage with the body, its situatedness, and its material networks, all of which enact punishment as a social phenomenon. Employing Jane Bennett's ethics of affective enchantment, grounded in the ethico-onto-epistemology of new materialist thinkers, this paper critiques the majority opinion in Provenzano by demonstrating how it feeds into modern disenchantment. It then draws on Provenzano's landmark dissent to show how ethical practice stems from deliberately opening oneself up to the wonderment of an entangled world produced through the acknowledgement of nonhuman selves and plastic bodies. This has the potential to generate an understanding of ‘humane’ punishment that better, and more meaningfully accounts for how human beings relate to and engage with the world around them.

Justice and Faith: The Frank Murphy Story by Greg Zipes

Reviewed by: Justice and Faith: The Frank Murphy Story by Greg Zipes Florence Wagman Roisman Greg Zipes. Justice and Faith: The Frank Murphy Story. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2021. Pp. 352. Bibliography. Illustrations. Index. Notes. Paperback: $34.95. William Francis—Frank—Murphy was a Detroit trial judge, mayor of Detroit, governor of Michigan, governor-general of the Philippines, US [End Page 163] attorney general, and associate justice of the US Supreme Court. As a trial judge, he presided with notable fairness over the NAACP's most significant case of the 1920s—the prosecutions of Dr. Ossian Sweet, a Black physician, and his family and friends who were accused of murdering a White man who had been part of a mob that threatened the Sweets' occupancy of a home Sweet had purchased in a "white neighborhood." As mayor, Murphy opposed the Ku Klux Klan and sought to provide relief from the Great Depression; Zipes credits Murphy with helping to create the US Conference of Mayors and encouraging federal aid to cities. As governor, faced in the 1930s with autoworkers' sit-down strikes, he refused to use force against the strikers and instead "ordered the State Welfare Department to provide food to the striking workers . . . ." (154) Attorney General Murphy created the US Department of Justice's Civil Liberties Unit (later renamed the Civil Rights Division), continuing his lifelong support for positions urged by the NAACP and ACLU and spearheading important reforms in criminal procedure. Justice Murphy wrote important decisions with respect to labor law (choosing one such case, Thornhill v. Alabama, for his first majority opinion), as well as civil liberties, civil rights, and criminal justice. He early repudiated the "separate but equal" doctrine, introduced the word "racism" to US Supreme Court opinions, and authored one of the bravest—his dissent in Korematsu v. U.S., in which the majority shamefully upheld the internment of Japanese Americans in the United States. (The Supreme Court disavowed that decision in Trump v. Hawaii in 2018, not overruling it as Zipes says (259, 266), but stating that it "was gravely wrong the day it was decided [and] has been overruled in the court of history . . . ." Justice Murphy's dissent in Korematsu was cited in the 2018 dissent by Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg.) As in Korematsu, Murphy's separate opinions, concurring or dissenting, often sounded a "fiery moral tone." (295) Murphy's devout Catholicism, political ambition, and possible homosexuality amplify the complications of his life. Murphy brings great honor to Michigan, but despite his many accomplishments, he is almost unknown today. Zipes makes a significant contribution by bringing new attention to Murphy. Zipes's admiring, brief book offers an enticing introduction to this important but oft-neglected figure. The first pages of Zipes's concluding chapter (290-295) outline what he lauds in Murphy: "his desire to uplift the truly destitute" and "defend unpopular groups from attack." (290) Unfortunately, the book's brevity and Zipes's adulation sometimes produce misleading praise of Murphy where a more nuanced assessment [End Page 164] would be appropriate. Thus, to take one example, Zipes's reference to the 1932 "Hunger March" of unemployed Ford autoworkers suggests that the Detroit police adhered to Governor Murphy's intention that they not "intervene" (101) when the workers crossed into Dearborn and were viciously attacked by police there, but the earlier, fuller account by Sidney Fine shows that the Detroit police were at least peripherally involved and Murphy made "no adequate effort" to determine how they had behaved (Fine, The Detroit Years, 409). Similar instances appear elsewhere in the book. Moreover, the book is marred by errors that a distinguished university press should have prevented. One hopes that Zipes's book will lead readers to the seminal three-volume biography by Sidney Fine (1975, 1979, 1984). The University of Michigan Press would perform a public service by reprinting those volumes, including the second, which was published originally by the University of Chicago Press. Zipes had access to material not available to Fine; an objective, thorough, balanced updating of the Fine biography also would be most welcome. [End Page 165] Florence Wagman Roisman Robert H. McKinney School of Law Indiana University Copyright © 2022...

Courting Prom Night Voters

A creature of state law, voter registration is a point of national contention and a subject that frequents partisan debate. Federal legislation—meant to unsew a patchwork quilt of discriminatory practices against voters—complicated the voter registration process. States have changed their voter registration laws in the wake of Supreme Court opinions and prolonged litigation. But an opportunity endures for states to take further accountability for their younger voting-age populations without more federal intervention. By amending their election codes to require that high school graduates choose whether to register to vote, states can act as legislative laboratories and court their prom night voters to guarantee the fundamental right to vote.

Can Markets Predict Supreme Court Rulings for Corporate Cases?

What happens when a company�s case goes to the Supreme Court? How does it influence stock and options prices? And do investors price their anticipation of the outcome into these markets

Rise of the ‘Gig Worker’ Economy or Just Mending the Legislative Leak?

This article assesses the extent to which the UK’s Supreme Court (UKSC) rulings in Uber and Pimlico Plumbers have resolved the long-standing conundrum facing employers of the label ‘worker’. This analysis raises critical issues relating to the effectiveness or otherwise of regulation of the gig economy. Furthermore, it seeks to question how the gig economy is reframing employment law. Employment law, employment status, worker status, gig economy, employment rights

Supreme Court Ruling on the Texas Abortion Law

This Viewpoint discusses the recent US Supreme Court ruling on SB8, the Texas law that prohibits abortion after 6 weeks of gestational age, and the effect the ruling could have on other constitutional rights.

The US Supreme Court’s Rulings on Large Business and Health Care Worker Vaccine Mandates

This Viewpoint examines the recent US Supreme Court rulings on government mandates for COVID-19 vaccination and how these decisions might affect the ongoing pandemic response as well as the future of public health.