1702693133
1702693134
1702693135
1702693136
1702693137
1702693138
1702693139
1702693140
1702693141
1702693142
1702693143
1702693144
1702693145
1702693146
1702693147
1702693148
1702693149
1702693150
1702693151
1702693152
1702693153
1702693154
1702693155
1702693156
美国最高法院通识读本 [:1702690393]
1702693157
美国最高法院通识读本 References
1702693158
1702693159
Chapter 1
1702693160
1702693161
The activities of the Justices while riding circuit are discussed in detail in volumes 2 (1989) and 3 (1990) of The Documentary History of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789–1800 (New York: Columbia University Press). John Jay’s letter to John Adams, declining the president’s offer of resuming the position of Chief Justice, is reprinted in The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, ed. Henry P. Johnson (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890), 4:284–85. It is cited in Michael J. Klarman’s interesting article, “How Great Were the ‘Great’ Marshall Court Decisions?”Virginia Law Review 87:1111, 1154, n. 226.
1702693162
1702693163
For a recent citation of John Marshall’s famous line about the Court’s “province and duty” to “say what the law is,” see the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in Boumediene v. Bush, invalidating an act of Congress that stripped the federal courts of jurisdiction to hear cases brought by detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy said that “[t]o hold the political branches have the power to switch the Constitution on or off at will … would permit a striking anomaly in our tripartite system of government, leading to a regime in which Congress and the President, not this Court, say ‘what the law is’” [citing Marbury].
1702693164
1702693165
For a list of congressional enactments that the Supreme Court has overruled, see the Constitution of the United States, Analysis and Interpretation, published by the Government Printing Office and available on line at www/gpoaccess.gov/constitution/ pdf2002/046.pdf .
1702693166
1702693167
Chapter 2
1702693168
1702693169
The Supreme Court’s Rule 13 provides that petitions for certiorari must be filed within ninety days from the lower court’s entry of“final judgment.” The rule for judicial deference to an agency’s plausible interpretation of an ambiguous statute is set out in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984). The doctrine is known as “Chevron deference.”
1702693170
1702693171
Chapter 3
1702693172
1702693173
For illustrations and analysis of the ways in which Justices have shifted over time from their original ideological positions, see the article by Lee Epstein and her co-authors, “Ideological Drift Among Supreme Court Justices: Who, When, and How Important?”Northwestern Law Review Colloquy 101 (2007): 127–31. The scholar who identified the presence or absence of prior executive branch experience as predictive of a new Supreme Court justice’s eventual ideological shift was Michael C. Dorf in his article “Does Federal Executive Branch Experience Explain Why Some Republican Supreme Court Justices ‘Evolve’ and Others Don’t?” Harvard Law& Policy Review 1 (2007): 457–76. The six justices in Dorf’s “no experience” group were Blackmun, Powell, Stevens, O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter. In the “experienced” group were Burger, Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito. While this study was concluded very early in the tenures of Roberts and Alito, the author noted that “preliminary evidence indicates that the pattern will also hold” for them. The scholar who examined a nominee’s geographic origin as a factor was Lawrence Baum in his book Judges and Their Audiences: A Perspective on Judicial Behavior (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006). On this topic, see also my article “Change and Continuity on the Supreme Court,” Washington University Journal of Law and Policy 25 (2007): 39–59, which focuses on the example of Harry Blackmun.
1702693174
1702693175
For a detailed account of the effort to impeach Justice Douglas, see David E. Kyvig’s The Age of Impeachment: American Constitutional Culture Since 1960 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008).
1702693176
1702693177
On the debate over life tenure for Supreme Court Justices, see Reforming the Courts: Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices, ed. Roger C. Cramton and Paul D. Carrington (Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2006) and Sanford Levinson’s Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We the People Can Correct It) (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).
1702693178
1702693179
Chapter 4
1702693180
1702693181
Chief Justice Rehnquist was a fan of Gilbert and Sullivan, and his quip about his performance during the Clinton impeachment came from a reference to the House of Lords in one of his favorite Gilbert and Sullivan operettas, Iolanthe.
1702693182