LibGuides: Judiciary & Supreme Court : Articles

Get an Overview

Get an overview from COM Library databases. Must access on campus or login with your COM account for off campus access.

Featured Articles

Try these articles to get started. Must access on campus or login with your COM account for off campus access.

Want more on finding articles? Try How to Find Articles.

The Adjudicative Model of Precedent
The 2020 U.S. Supreme Court and Political Identity
Can Structural Changes Fix the Supreme Court?
Crafting Enhanced Rights for the Religious Business Owner: An Examination of the Supreme Court Decision in Hobby Lobby One of the most anticipated decisions of the 2013-2014 term of the US Supreme Court involved the confluence of two controversial federal statutes: 1. the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) and 2. the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA). The joint cases of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation v. Burwell (for this article combined under the name Hobby Lobby) presented to the Court the question whether closely held businesses and their owners may use a provision of the RFRA as a valid reason for refusing to comply with an administrative regulation promulgated under the ACA requiring businesses to offer certain contraceptives in their self-funded health plan that offend the religious beliefs of the owners of the businesses. The Hobby Lobby decision provides support for the proposition that religion and commerce can co-exist. For religious business owners, as with religious employees, there should be tolerance in the legal system for the expression of religious liberty interests within the business environment.
Do the Supreme Court's Same-Sex Marriage Decisions Raise More Questions than they Resolve? On Jun 26, 2013, the US Supreme Court issued decisions in two high-profile cases, United States of America v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry, in which federal appellate courts had invalidated restraints against same-sex marriage as unconstitutional. Because the Windsor Court case did not label its "equal protection" constitutional methodology, predicting future decisions by federal courts in the wake of the two decisions will remain an uncertain science. The decisions thus raise more questions than they resolve. The following article provides the factual background of the two cases, a discussion of their significance for plan designers and plan sponsors or administrators, a primer on constitutional levels of scrutiny likely to be addressed in future decisions, a summary of the Supreme Court decisions and the federal appellate decisions that led to Supreme Court review, and a discussion of several issues raised but not resolved by the decisions.
Law v. Siegel: U.S. Supreme Court Limits Reach of § 105(a) n Law v. Siegel, the Court ruled that § 105 cannot override a specific provision in the Bankruptcy Code, including the Code's exemption scheme. The Supreme Court's ruling reaffirms the well-settled proposition that bankruptcy courts' equitable powers are largely cabined by the four walls of the Bankruptcy Code. Nevertheless, the Court's decision may provide guidance to lower courts seeking to fashion practical remedies to bad-faith conduct. Citing its holding in Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Mass, the Court recognized that § 105 conferred on bankruptcy courts inherent power to sanction abusive litigation practices under § 105(a). In exercising such power, the Court advised, bankruptcy courts cannot contravene specific provisions of the Code. In holding that orders issued under § 105 may not conflict with specific statutory provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, Siegel reaffirms a well-settled proposition.
Money, Sex, and Religion -- the Supreme Court's ACA Sequel In Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court ruled that the ACA burdens the exercise of religion by imposing fines if a company does not provide insurance coverage for all FDA-approved contraception. The authors argue that this undermines the ACA's goal of universal access to health care.
Reflections on the Supreme Court Appointment Process
Save this Honorable Court: Shaping Public Perceptions of the Supreme Court Off the Bench
Tinkering with the Machinery of Death: Capital Punishment's Toll On The American Judiciary Death penalty cases involve many unique procedural elements, distinctive incentives for death row inmates to exhaust every option, and an obligation on judges to make emotionally charged life or death decisions. The result is that these cases take an immense toll on the judiciary that is greater than in any other type of criminal case. Hintze discusses the death penalty's toll on the American judiciary.
US Supreme Court Rejects 'Presumption of Prudence' in ERISA Stock-Drop Cases and Adopts New Pleading Standards in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer On June 25, 2014, the US Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, eliminating the "presumption of prudence" in so-called "stock-drop" cases. Although the elimination of the presumption of prudence is a loss for plan fiduciaries, the Court's opinion contains several positive elements for plan sponsors and fiduciaries: an emphasis on the pleading standard for plaintiffs to avoid a motion to dismiss, a new focus on the reliability of stock market prices, and a recognition of the practical problems of fiduciaries with negative inside information. The decision provides significant alternative grounds to defend these cases and puts a high burden on plaintiffs to plead specific facts to avoid early dismissal of cases about public company stock funds. The decision also raises important questions for plan sponsors, such as whether to change language requiring that certain contributions be invested in a company stock fund and whether to engage an independent fiduciary to manage the company stock fund. These issues are even more critical for fiduciaries of plans sponsored by nonpublic companies that cannot rely on the Court's emphasis of the market price of a publicly traded stock as a defense.

Featured Journals

Full text journals from COM Library databases. Must access on campus or login with your COM account for off campus access.

Search for journals or browse by category for more.

The American Political Science Review
Full Text Delayed 1 year
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Full text delayed three years
Constitutional Political Economy
Full Text Delayed 1 year
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy
International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society
International Organization
Full Text Delayed 1 year
Journal of Democracy
Full Text Delayed 1 year
National Civic Review
Perspectives on Politics
Perspectives on Politics
Political Analysis
Full Text Delayed 1 year
Political Behavior
Full Text Delayed 1 year
Political Science Quarterly
PS, Political Science & Politics
Full Text Delayed 1 year
Roll Call
Studies in American Political Development
Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights

Top Databases

Finding time for research can be a real juggling act. Use COM Library's databases to get the college level articles you need for your research faster.