Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1825569
 


 



Is the Roberts Court Really a Court?


Eric Segall


Georgia State University College of Law

2011

Stetson Law Review, Vol. 40, p. 1, 2011
Georgia State University College of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2011-10

Abstract:     
When facing a question that the law does not clearly answer, courts are generally obligated to resolve legal disputes by examining, interpreting, and applying prior positive law such as text and precedent. This Article argues that three cases decided by the Roberts Court – Gonzales v. Carhart, District of Columbia v. Heller, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission – exemplify the Supreme Court’s propensity for disregarding prior positive law when deciding cases. The Author contends that the Roberts Court, quite possibly like all the Supreme Courts before it, is not a “court” at all because it does not take prior law seriously and does not transparently provide true justifications for its conclusions.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Keywords: Supreme Court, SCOTUS, Citizens United, John Robets, Precedent, Stare Decisis, Judicial Review

JEL Classification: K00, K30, K40

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: May 2, 2011  

Suggested Citation

Segall, Eric, Is the Roberts Court Really a Court? (2011). Stetson Law Review, Vol. 40, p. 1, 2011; Georgia State University College of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2011-10. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1825569

Contact Information

Eric Segall (Contact Author)
Georgia State University College of Law ( email )
P.O. Box 4037
Atlanta, GA 30302-4037
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,164
Downloads: 206
Download Rank: 81,640

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.484 seconds