Separation of Powers Challenge to Sarbanes-Oxley: Lyle Denniston reports on SCOTUSblog that on Monday Free Enterprise Fund offered its petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court to challenge the constitutionality of the Public Accounting Oversight Board. The case, Free Enterprise Fund, et al., v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, et al., asks whether the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 violates the Constitution's separation of powers by vesting members of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board ("PCAOB") with far-reaching executive power while completely stripping the President of authority to appoint or remove those members or otherwise supervise or control their exercise of that power. According to Denniston, Congress created the Oversight Board after the Enron scandal to regulate auditing firms that review the books of public companies. This sounds good, but according to Petitioners, the Board violates separation of powers principles. The D.C. Circuit Court upheld the Board in a 2-1 vote and rehearing was denied 5-4. Mike Scarcella also has this post on the petition at Blog of the Legal Times.
Is A Six Person Jury Enough?: At Wall Street Journal Blog Dan Slater comments on an article on today's Wall Street Journal Opinion page that asks the Supreme Court to take up a challenge to Williams v. Florida which reasoned the 12 juror "requirement cannot be regarded as an indispensable component of the Sixth Amendment." The article's authors, Steven Calabresi and Michael Saks, both law professors, urge the Court to take up the case of Deltoro v. Florida. Apparently, Deltoro was convicted of sexually assaulting his daughter, and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole by a six person jury. According to Calabresi and Saks, a six person jury was permissible in Deltoro's case "because, in 1970, the Supreme Court decided that when the Framers used the word 'jury' in the Constitution they meant to specify no particular number of jurors. The court held that juries could be as small as six and perhaps even smaller." Slater reports that Saks and Calabresi believe this ruling to be contrary to the original meaning of the Constitution because juries with fewer than twelve jurors do not have the same "capacity for cross-sectional representation." Stay tuned to see if the Court decides to take up the challenge.
Deception Research: Deception Blog, apparently an offshoot of the Psychology and Crime News Blog, has a six-part series on recent research on lying, a subject highly relevant to criminal trials.
Is A Six Person Jury Enough?: At Wall Street Journal Blog Dan Slater comments on an article on today's Wall Street Journal Opinion page that asks the Supreme Court to take up a challenge to Williams v. Florida which reasoned the 12 juror "requirement cannot be regarded as an indispensable component of the Sixth Amendment." The article's authors, Steven Calabresi and Michael Saks, both law professors, urge the Court to take up the case of Deltoro v. Florida. Apparently, Deltoro was convicted of sexually assaulting his daughter, and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole by a six person jury. According to Calabresi and Saks, a six person jury was permissible in Deltoro's case "because, in 1970, the Supreme Court decided that when the Framers used the word 'jury' in the Constitution they meant to specify no particular number of jurors. The court held that juries could be as small as six and perhaps even smaller." Slater reports that Saks and Calabresi believe this ruling to be contrary to the original meaning of the Constitution because juries with fewer than twelve jurors do not have the same "capacity for cross-sectional representation." Stay tuned to see if the Court decides to take up the challenge.
Deception Research: Deception Blog, apparently an offshoot of the Psychology and Crime News Blog, has a six-part series on recent research on lying, a subject highly relevant to criminal trials.
Leave a comment