• Heritage Action
  • More

Federal Judicial Branch

Our Research & Offerings on Federal Judicial Branch
  • Commentary posted July 8, 2014 by Alden Abbott Supremes Preserve Fraud on the Market (and Bail Out Class Action Plaintiffs) - Time for Congress to Kill it

    On June 23 the Supreme Court regrettably declined the chance to stem the abuses of private fraud-based class action securities litigation.  In Halliburton v. EPJ Fund (June 23, 2014), a six-Justice Supreme Court majority (Chief Justice Roberts writing for the Court, joined by Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan) reversed the Fifth Circuit and held that a class…

  • Issue Brief posted April 25, 2014 by Elizabeth Slattery Supreme Court 101: A Primer for Non-Lawyers

    A common refrain from lawyers is that they will take a case “all the way to the Supreme Court,” but it is easier said than done to get the Supreme Court to review a case. The Supreme Court of the United States agrees to hear only a small number of cases each term, so the odds are stacked against most litigants. The reasons why the Court declines to hear particular cases…

  • Legal Memorandum posted October 9, 2013 by Michael Stern The Supreme Court Considers the President’s Power to Make Recess Appointments

    In its new term, the Supreme Court of the United States will consider National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, a challenge to President Barack Obama’s January 4, 2012, recess appointments to fill three National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) vacancies. At the time of these appointments, every three days, the Senate was conducting pro forma sessions during which no…

  • Commentary posted September 4, 2013 by Hans A. von Spakovsky Amendments for Liberty

    Mark Levin’s new book (The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic, published by Simon & Schuster) should be required reading for conservative bloggers, reporters, radio talk-show hosts, state legislators, members of Congress, and grassroots activists all over America. It provides a coherent plan to restore our constitutional republic, reversing the damage…

  • Legal Memorandum posted July 31, 2013 by Paul Larkin “Sauce for the Goose Is Sauce for the Gander”: Treating Private Parties and Government Officials Alike Under the Criminal Law

    While Congress is principally responsible for overcriminalization,[1] the federal courts deserve their share of the blame.[2] In their readiness to interpret federal statutes broadly, the federal bench has created expansive rules of direct and vicarious criminal liability.[3] In that process, however, the courts have not stopped to ask the question, “Should the same rules…

  • Legal Memorandum posted July 17, 2013 by Hans A. von Spakovsky The Unfair Attack on Arbitration: Harming Consumers by Eliminating a Proven Dispute Resolution System

    I should dread a lawsuit beyond almost anything else short of sickness and death. —Judge Learned Han[1] Over the past several years, there have been numerous attacks in the courts and in Congress on the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and the arbitration process. Critics want to eliminate the use of arbitration in consumer and employment disputes, claiming that it is…

  • Backgrounder posted March 27, 2013 by Andrew Kloster Why Congress and the Courts Must Respect Citizens’ Rights to Arbitration

    In 1925, Congress passed the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA),[1] establishing a strong federal policy in favor of arbitration. A form of alternative dispute resolution, arbitration reduces litigation costs, a savings that is passed on to consumers. Despite its advantages, however, arbitration has recently come under attack in Congress, executive agencies, and the courts.…

  • Lecture posted October 10, 2012 by The Honorable Alice M. Batchelder Suppose Joseph Story Had Been Right and Brutus Had Been Wrong

    Abstract: Brutus, one of the loose-knit group of Anti-Federalists who opposed the adoption of the Constitution, was convinced that the new government would prove to be a national, not a federal, government; that the several states would cease to exist as sovereign entities; and that the judiciary would be instrumental in causing that result. Joseph Story, a proponent of a…

  • Backgrounder posted October 10, 2012 by Dominique Ludvigson Circumventing Citizens on Marriage: A Survey

    Abstract: Despite a history of consistent voter support for traditional marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to address questions concerning this foundational social institution. The issue has been forced onto the Court’s docket by activist judges who have overruled democratically established marriage policies and by executive branch officials who have…

  • Legal Memorandum posted September 21, 2012 by Paul Larkin, Elizabeth Slattery Overview of the Supreme Court’s October Term, 2012

    Abstract: Given the excitement and importance of the recently concluded Supreme Court term, it is possible that the upcoming term will lack the same dazzling array of issues; just as not every baseball lineup is loaded with players like the 1927 Yankees Murderers Row, not every Supreme Court term is chock-full of Hall of Fame cases. Still, the next few years promise their…

Find more work on Federal Judicial Branch
  • Legal Memorandum posted July 17, 2013 by Hans A. von Spakovsky The Unfair Attack on Arbitration: Harming Consumers by Eliminating a Proven Dispute Resolution System

    I should dread a lawsuit beyond almost anything else short of sickness and death. —Judge Learned Han[1] Over the past several years, there have been numerous attacks in the courts and in Congress on the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and the arbitration process. Critics want to eliminate the use of arbitration in consumer and employment disputes, claiming that it is…

  • WebMemo posted September 9, 2010 by Colleen Pero Hijacking Justice: The Well-Funded Campaign to Replace Judicial Elections with Selection by Liberal Special Interests

    Over the past 10 years, special interests have engaged in a highly coordinated, well-funded campaign to fundamentally alter the composition of America’s state courts. The campaign’s goal: to exclude conservative, rule-of-law judges from the bench. This campaign has been bankrolled by George Soros, a hedge fund operator with a net worth of $13 billion, according to the…

  • Legal Memorandum posted October 9, 2013 by Michael Stern The Supreme Court Considers the President’s Power to Make Recess Appointments

    In its new term, the Supreme Court of the United States will consider National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, a challenge to President Barack Obama’s January 4, 2012, recess appointments to fill three National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) vacancies. At the time of these appointments, every three days, the Senate was conducting pro forma sessions during which no…

  • Backgrounder posted October 10, 2012 by Dominique Ludvigson Circumventing Citizens on Marriage: A Survey

    Abstract: Despite a history of consistent voter support for traditional marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to address questions concerning this foundational social institution. The issue has been forced onto the Court’s docket by activist judges who have overruled democratically established marriage policies and by executive branch officials who have…

  • Testimony posted December 13, 2011 by Edwin Meese III Principles for Revising the Criminal Code

    Testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security December 13, 2011 Edwin Meese IIIChairman, Center for Legal & Judicial StudiesThe Heritage Foundation Mr. Chairman, Vice-Chairman Gohmert, Ranking Member Scott, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to present my views…

  • Backgrounder posted March 27, 2013 by Andrew Kloster Why Congress and the Courts Must Respect Citizens’ Rights to Arbitration

    In 1925, Congress passed the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA),[1] establishing a strong federal policy in favor of arbitration. A form of alternative dispute resolution, arbitration reduces litigation costs, a savings that is passed on to consumers. Despite its advantages, however, arbitration has recently come under attack in Congress, executive agencies, and the courts.…

  • Lecture posted October 10, 2012 by The Honorable Alice M. Batchelder Suppose Joseph Story Had Been Right and Brutus Had Been Wrong

    Abstract: Brutus, one of the loose-knit group of Anti-Federalists who opposed the adoption of the Constitution, was convinced that the new government would prove to be a national, not a federal, government; that the several states would cease to exist as sovereign entities; and that the judiciary would be instrumental in causing that result. Joseph Story, a proponent of a…

  • Issue Brief posted May 10, 2012 by Paul Larkin The FOCUS Act Hearing: Unpersuasive Criticisms and Tacit Admissions

    Thankfully, the law sometimes reflects common sense. Here’s an example: Innocent people ordinarily do not remain silent when accused of having committed a crime or some other misconduct. As the result, it is reasonable to infer that such an accusation is true if a person does not deny it. In the law, that sensible proposition is embodied in the doctrine of “Tacit…

  • Issue Brief posted April 25, 2014 by Elizabeth Slattery Supreme Court 101: A Primer for Non-Lawyers

    A common refrain from lawyers is that they will take a case “all the way to the Supreme Court,” but it is easier said than done to get the Supreme Court to review a case. The Supreme Court of the United States agrees to hear only a small number of cases each term, so the odds are stacked against most litigants. The reasons why the Court declines to hear particular cases…

  • Issue Brief posted March 20, 2012 by Charles "Cully" Stimson, Elizabeth Slattery Juvenile Life Sentences: Constitutionality of Life Without Parole for Teenage Murderers

    On Tuesday, March 20, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in two cases involving the constitutionality of sentences of life without parole (LWOP) for teenage murderers. The real issue before the Court is this: Will the Court again “find” or “invent” a heretofore undiscovered constitutional prohibition and thus strike an entire category of sentences for the most violent…

Find more work on Federal Judicial Branch
  • Issue Brief posted April 25, 2014 by Elizabeth Slattery Supreme Court 101: A Primer for Non-Lawyers

    A common refrain from lawyers is that they will take a case “all the way to the Supreme Court,” but it is easier said than done to get the Supreme Court to review a case. The Supreme Court of the United States agrees to hear only a small number of cases each term, so the odds are stacked against most litigants. The reasons why the Court declines to hear particular cases…

  • Legal Memorandum posted October 9, 2013 by Michael Stern The Supreme Court Considers the President’s Power to Make Recess Appointments

    In its new term, the Supreme Court of the United States will consider National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, a challenge to President Barack Obama’s January 4, 2012, recess appointments to fill three National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) vacancies. At the time of these appointments, every three days, the Senate was conducting pro forma sessions during which no…

  • Legal Memorandum posted July 31, 2013 by Paul Larkin “Sauce for the Goose Is Sauce for the Gander”: Treating Private Parties and Government Officials Alike Under the Criminal Law

    While Congress is principally responsible for overcriminalization,[1] the federal courts deserve their share of the blame.[2] In their readiness to interpret federal statutes broadly, the federal bench has created expansive rules of direct and vicarious criminal liability.[3] In that process, however, the courts have not stopped to ask the question, “Should the same rules…

  • Legal Memorandum posted July 17, 2013 by Hans A. von Spakovsky The Unfair Attack on Arbitration: Harming Consumers by Eliminating a Proven Dispute Resolution System

    I should dread a lawsuit beyond almost anything else short of sickness and death. —Judge Learned Han[1] Over the past several years, there have been numerous attacks in the courts and in Congress on the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and the arbitration process. Critics want to eliminate the use of arbitration in consumer and employment disputes, claiming that it is…

  • Backgrounder posted March 27, 2013 by Andrew Kloster Why Congress and the Courts Must Respect Citizens’ Rights to Arbitration

    In 1925, Congress passed the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA),[1] establishing a strong federal policy in favor of arbitration. A form of alternative dispute resolution, arbitration reduces litigation costs, a savings that is passed on to consumers. Despite its advantages, however, arbitration has recently come under attack in Congress, executive agencies, and the courts.…

  • Backgrounder posted October 10, 2012 by Dominique Ludvigson Circumventing Citizens on Marriage: A Survey

    Abstract: Despite a history of consistent voter support for traditional marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to address questions concerning this foundational social institution. The issue has been forced onto the Court’s docket by activist judges who have overruled democratically established marriage policies and by executive branch officials who have…

  • Legal Memorandum posted September 21, 2012 by Paul Larkin, Elizabeth Slattery Overview of the Supreme Court’s October Term, 2012

    Abstract: Given the excitement and importance of the recently concluded Supreme Court term, it is possible that the upcoming term will lack the same dazzling array of issues; just as not every baseball lineup is loaded with players like the 1927 Yankees Murderers Row, not every Supreme Court term is chock-full of Hall of Fame cases. Still, the next few years promise their…

  • Issue Brief posted May 22, 2012 by Andrew M. Grossman Dismissing Padilla v. Yoo: A Glass Half Empty?

    The Ninth Circuit correctly dismissed Jose Padilla’s lawsuit against John Yoo, the former Department of Justice official who provided key analysis of legal questions arising from the war on terrorism. But being the traditionally liberal and oft-reversed Ninth Circuit, the court could not leave well enough alone and issued an opinion that casts doubt on the lawfulness of…

  • Issue Brief posted May 10, 2012 by Paul Larkin The FOCUS Act Hearing: Unpersuasive Criticisms and Tacit Admissions

    Thankfully, the law sometimes reflects common sense. Here’s an example: Innocent people ordinarily do not remain silent when accused of having committed a crime or some other misconduct. As the result, it is reasonable to infer that such an accusation is true if a person does not deny it. In the law, that sensible proposition is embodied in the doctrine of “Tacit…

  • Issue Brief posted March 20, 2012 by Charles "Cully" Stimson, Elizabeth Slattery Juvenile Life Sentences: Constitutionality of Life Without Parole for Teenage Murderers

    On Tuesday, March 20, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in two cases involving the constitutionality of sentences of life without parole (LWOP) for teenage murderers. The real issue before the Court is this: Will the Court again “find” or “invent” a heretofore undiscovered constitutional prohibition and thus strike an entire category of sentences for the most violent…

Find more work on Federal Judicial Branch