Judge Sotomayor's Senate Interviews: At Wall Street Journal Blog, Ashby Jones reports that during interviews with Senators Leahy and Sessions, Judge Sotomayor stated she would "ultimately and completely" follow the law once she is confirmed. David Ingram also wrote about Judge Sotomayor's new "catch phrase" at Blog of the Legal Times yesterday. According to both reporters, the interviews went well for Sotomayor. Although, Jones also reports that Senator Sessions did not feel he had adequately addressed his concerns that she might be a judicial activist.
Comments On A Profile of the Chief Justice: In mid-May we posted a link to Kashmir Hill's post on Jeffrey Toobin's New Yorker article on Chief Justice John Roberts. On May 23, Joel Jacobsen posted his thoughts on his website Judging Crimes. And today, Jonathan Adler writes on Volokh Conspiracy that the article is "infected with a subtle spin that results in a distorted picture of the Chief Justice and the Court." Adler's thoughts echo Jacobsen's comment that Toobin's piece reveals more about Toobin than it does about the Chief Justice. Jacobsen is critical of Toobin's take on Chief Justice Roberts, and writes that judges, as government actors, are meant to reinforce existing power relationships. Adler's post goes further and points out that the Chief Justice has not always sided with "existing power relationships." One example? Heller v. District of Columbia.
Death Penalty Prevents "Legislative Backlash": At Sentencing Law and Policy, Doug Berman posts a guest post by W. David Ball, a Fellow at the Stanford Criminal Justice Center. Ball's guest post wonders whether there was something behind Herbert Wechsler's belief that the death penalty "had utilitarian value for criminal law, if for no other reason then as a prophylactic against legislative backlash." Wechsler was the Reporter of the first Model Penal Code, and according to W. David Ball, a utilitarian. Wechsler apparently believed that after a particularly heinous crime, the availability of the death penalty created a kind of safety valve for popular outrage because it allowed the public to turn against the criminal, and not the legislature. Ball wonders if California Supreme Court's decision to affirm the death sentence of Richard Allen Davis - the man who inspired "California's 'three strikes law" - disproves Wechsler's theory.
Supreme Court to Overhaul Website: Yesterday, in the New York Times, Katharine Q. Seelye reported that the Supreme Court has requested $800,000 from Congress to rework its website. The current website is fairly basic, and Seelye reports that the Court has asked Congress for funds so that it is more user friendly, and so that the Court may post opinions "within five minutes of their announcement in court." One organization, the Sunlight Foundation, has proposed to re-design the website as part of a "redesigning the government" series. According to Seelye, the organization believes the website "must strive to make the Court's proceedings transparent, incorporate modern design principles, and meet the higher expectations of today's web user."
Comments On A Profile of the Chief Justice: In mid-May we posted a link to Kashmir Hill's post on Jeffrey Toobin's New Yorker article on Chief Justice John Roberts. On May 23, Joel Jacobsen posted his thoughts on his website Judging Crimes. And today, Jonathan Adler writes on Volokh Conspiracy that the article is "infected with a subtle spin that results in a distorted picture of the Chief Justice and the Court." Adler's thoughts echo Jacobsen's comment that Toobin's piece reveals more about Toobin than it does about the Chief Justice. Jacobsen is critical of Toobin's take on Chief Justice Roberts, and writes that judges, as government actors, are meant to reinforce existing power relationships. Adler's post goes further and points out that the Chief Justice has not always sided with "existing power relationships." One example? Heller v. District of Columbia.
Death Penalty Prevents "Legislative Backlash": At Sentencing Law and Policy, Doug Berman posts a guest post by W. David Ball, a Fellow at the Stanford Criminal Justice Center. Ball's guest post wonders whether there was something behind Herbert Wechsler's belief that the death penalty "had utilitarian value for criminal law, if for no other reason then as a prophylactic against legislative backlash." Wechsler was the Reporter of the first Model Penal Code, and according to W. David Ball, a utilitarian. Wechsler apparently believed that after a particularly heinous crime, the availability of the death penalty created a kind of safety valve for popular outrage because it allowed the public to turn against the criminal, and not the legislature. Ball wonders if California Supreme Court's decision to affirm the death sentence of Richard Allen Davis - the man who inspired "California's 'three strikes law" - disproves Wechsler's theory.
Supreme Court to Overhaul Website: Yesterday, in the New York Times, Katharine Q. Seelye reported that the Supreme Court has requested $800,000 from Congress to rework its website. The current website is fairly basic, and Seelye reports that the Court has asked Congress for funds so that it is more user friendly, and so that the Court may post opinions "within five minutes of their announcement in court." One organization, the Sunlight Foundation, has proposed to re-design the website as part of a "redesigning the government" series. According to Seelye, the organization believes the website "must strive to make the Court's proceedings transparent, incorporate modern design principles, and meet the higher expectations of today's web user."
Leave a comment