Why the Supreme Court is Not an Election Issue, and Why It Should Become One
JURIST Contributing Editor William G. Ross of Cumberland Law School at Samford University says that although the US Supreme Court has not been a significant issue thusfar in the current Presidential campaign, the likelihood of Presidential appointments to the Court...
JURIST Guest Columnist Sandra Jordan of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law considers what might happen if, as anticipated, the US Supreme Court applies its reasoning from its June 2004 Blakely ruling to the federal sentencing guidelines in two...
The Murder They Wrote: US Plots to Assassinate Pakistani Ambassador
JURIST Contibuting Editor Ali Khan of Washburn University School of Law says that a recent USDOJ plan to encourage two Muslims to provide funds to assassinate Pakistan's UN Ambassador shows disrespect for international law and may also violate laws against...
JURIST Guest Columnist and constitutional law scholar Thomas E. Baker of Florida International University College of Law says that the US Supreme Court's 2000 ruling in Bush v. Gore is a precedent that could be repeated after the presidential election...
Bush v. Gore and the Prestige of the Supreme Court: A Self-inflicted Wound?
The Court's authority — possessed of neither the purse nor the sword — ultimately rests on sustained public confidence in its moral sanction. Such feeling must be nourished by the Court's complete detachment, in fact and appearance, from political entanglements...
In past elections, so-called "faithless electors" cast innocuously eccentric votes that provided a quaint reminder of one of the archaic curiosities of the presidential selection process. After providing a rare element of surprise in the otherwise perfunctory Electoral College ritual,...
