• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Tag Archives: SCOTUS Blog

Plain English and the U.S. Supreme Court.

03 Thursday Mar 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Legal Writing, Plain Language, Readability, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Plain English and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Tags

Plain English, SCOTUS Blog, U.S. Supreme Court

Plain English/Language Made Simple, SCOTUSblog

http://www.scotusblog.com/category/plain-english/

This is our archive of posts in Plain English. You may also be interested in these resources:

Supreme Court Procedure
Glossary of Legal Terms
Biographies of the Justices

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

So What’s Going To Happen to Puerto Rico?

14 Thursday Jan 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on So What’s Going To Happen to Puerto Rico?

Tags

Lyle Denniston, Puetp Rico, SCOTUS Blog, Sovereignty, U.S. Supreme Court

Argument Analysis: Puerto Rico — Special No More?, by Lyle Denniston, SCOTUS Blog

http://bit.ly/1n4vFAC

It doesn’t happen often, but there are times when the very last words spoken by a lawyer during a Supreme Court argument sum up very clearly what the whole hour has been about.  That happened on Wednesday, when a lawyer’s closing, plaintive comment was: ‘Please do not take the constitution of Puerto Rico away from the people of Puerto Rico.’

*     *     *

That prospect was entirely opposite of what the current government leaders of Puerto Rico had sought in taking their case to the Supreme Court.  They wanted a declaration that, at least up to a point, Puerto Rico was entitled to the dignity of ‘sovereignty.’

Part of the problem in achieving ‘sovereignty,’ it appeared, is that the Court was not exactly sure what that word means. . . .  ‘

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

What It Means When Court Opinion’s Author Is “Per Curiam.”

17 Sunday Aug 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law

≈ Comments Off on What It Means When Court Opinion’s Author Is “Per Curiam.”

Tags

Appellate Court Opinions, Ira Robbins, Per Curiam, SCOTUS Blog

Scholarship Highlight: The Supreme Court’s Misuse Of Per Curiam Opinions, by Ira Robbins, SCOTUSblog

http://tinyurl.com/8d5qfr7

“Per Curiam” is a Latin phrase that means “by the court.” It is sometimes used to distinguish an opinion written by the entire court rather than one of the judges.

When I worked for a Justice at the Oklahoma Supreme Court, I saw only one “per curiam” opinion handed down by the Court.  Courts don’t decide appeals overnight. It usually takes a year or two before the Court renders an appeal. In this one unique situation, a case had languished for an inordinately long time. I will never know why the judge to whom the appeal had been assigned never got around to it.

To resolve the situation, the Chief Justice re-assigned the case to another judge, who made this particular appeal a priority. As quickly as possible, he wrote a draft opinion circulated to the rest of the court for consideration. When the opinion was adopted and handed down by the Court, the author written on the opinion itself said “per curiam.” The judge who actually wrote the opinion did not want to be unfairly criticized for the delay.

“Per curiam” can be used for other reasons. This post by Ira Robbins at SCOTUS Blog elaborates on the history, use, and misuse of this legal term of art. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Opinion on Affirmative Action.

22 Tuesday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Opinion on Affirmative Action.

Tags

Affirmative Action, Higher Education, Michigan, Michigan Constitution, Minorities, Public Universities, SCOTUS Blog, U.S. Supreme Court

Evening Round-Up: Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, by Kali Borkoski, SCOTUSblog

http://tinyurl.com/m8nung8

I have not yet read the entire opinion, as well as all of the separate opinions. This post provides links to many others that have already analyzed this decision and who wrote what. -CCE

This morning, a divided Court upheld an amendment to the Michigan constitution that prohibits the use of affirmative action by public universities in admissions.  Justice Kennedy announced the judgment of the Court in an opinion that was joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Alito.  Justice Scalia filed an opinion, concurring in the judgment only, that was joined by Justice Thomas, while Justice Breyer filed his own opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion (joined by Justice Ginsburg) and summarized her dissent from the bench. . . .

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Why Cases Before the Supreme Court Settle.

23 Saturday Nov 2013

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Why Cases Before the Supreme Court Settle.

Tags

Bloomberg Law, Legal Precedent, Oral Argument, SCOTUS Blog, Stephen Wermiel, United States Supreme Court

SCOTUS for law students (sponsored by Bloomberg Law): Why cases settle, by Stephen Wermiel, SCOTUS Blog

http://tinyurl.com/o9ohsjb

 If you want an unusual measure of the power of the Supreme Court, consider why parties to a case sometimes (although rarely) settle their dispute after the Justices have agreed to hear the appeal and as oral argument approaches.

In some cases, the answer may simply be fear of losing, but it can also be much more profound: not only the fear of losing, but also a concern that in the process the loss may establish a legal precedent for the nation that one side of the case considers harmful.

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...
Follow The Researching Paralegal on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Search

Sign In/Register

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Archives

  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Recent Comments

Eric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
How to Treat Bad Cli… on Why Do Bad Clients Deserve The…

Recent Comments

Eric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
How to Treat Bad Cli… on Why Do Bad Clients Deserve The…
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Join 487 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d bloggers like this: