1,301 research outputs found

    A Commander’s Power, A Civilian’s Reason: Justice Jackson’s Korematsu Dissent

    Get PDF
    Barrett examines the dissent opinion of Supreme Court Justice Robert Houghwout Jackson in Korematsu v. United States, which centered on the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII. Although the dissent has been criticized as incoherent, it contains strong legal implications within its complexity

    State of Ohio v. Richard D. Chilton and State of Ohio v. John W. Terry: The Suppression Hearing and Trial Transcripts

    Get PDF
    This appendix to Deciding the Stop and Frisk Cases: A Look Inside the Supreme Court’s Conference, 72 St. John’s L. Rev. 749 (1998), includes Biographical Information on the Participants in the Case; and transcripts of the complete pretrial and trial proceedings in the 1964 criminal prosecutions of Richard Chilton and John Terry, arranged by Prof. Barrett to create the organization reflected in the Table of Contents at the beginning of the appendix. Footnotes were added to provide citations and, in a few instances, to clarify the text. Bracketed material was added to correct obvious slips of the tongue or the typing finger. Other basic typographical errors were corrected without indication. Internal quotations during arguments by counsel also were conformed without indication to the original quoted material. The appendix includes: The Pretrial Hearing on Defendants\u27 Motions to Suppress Evidence (9/22/64); Direct Examination of Detective Martin; Chilton\u27s Trial (9/29/64); Terry\u27s Trial (10/2/64); the Court\u27s Finding; and Sentencing of Defendant Terry

    Henry T. King, Jr., at Case, and on the Nuremberg Case

    Get PDF
    Prof. Barrett reflects on his “teacher, colleague and friend for the past eight years,” Henry T. King, Jr. Through work at conferences, with the Robert H. Jackson Center and in many private discussions, Henry King became Prof. Barrett’s Nuremberg colleague in the academic and historical senses of that phrase. Henry also hoped and assumed that his friends at Case Western would, after his death, do right by his memory and convene a memorial event. Henry directed Prof. Barrett to attend on this occasion to speak about him and Case Western, and about him and Nuremberg

    Henry T. King, Jr., at Case, and on the Nuremberg Case

    Get PDF

    Appendices: Three Justices\u27 Notes on the Supreme Court Conferences On the Stop and Frisk Cases

    Get PDF

    Bringing Nuremberg Home: Justice Jackson\u27s Path back to Buffalo, October 4, 1946

    Get PDF

    Legacies of Nuremberg

    Get PDF
    (Excerpt) I am very grateful to the leaders and sponsoring organizations that have brought the Dialogs together for ten years, particularly this year in this very special place. I also thank, humbly, Germany and Nuremberg. We are seventy years out from a Nuremberg trial process that was filled with participants who could not have imagined the Germany, the Nuremberg city of human rights, and their sponsorship and teaching, that we all are beneficiaries of today. It is to the great credit of today\u27s generations of German leaders that they have built this Nuremberg. My topic, The Legacy of Nuremberg, is not a Justice Robert H. Jackson topic, although I will make some points that concern Jackson or are Jacksonian. I am in this lecture trying to imagine some of how I think Justice Jackson and his Nuremberg trial colleagues would have thought seventy years ago, looking ahead to our day and farther, about the potential legacies of the Nuremberg trial

    Independent Cousel Law Improvements for the Next Five Years

    Get PDF
    This Article is adapted from remarks made in New Orleans on January 8, 1999, as part of an Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Administrative Law Section panel discussion entitled, Separation of Powers Revisited: Should the Independent Counsel Law Be Renewed? Our topic is Should the Independent Counsel Law Be Renewed? and my answer is, Not exactly. I will not be, in other words, defending the status quo. Indeed, the empty chair you see here on the dais nicely contains the only defender of the status quo of whom I know. What I would like to do is remind us of the original rationale for the Independent Counsel statute, for that rationale is still valid and compelling today. I will then address some ways to improve the statute and some of the reasons why continuing it with modifications is preferable to the path of abandoning it
    • …
    corecore