Home  About us  Contact
 

Chief Justice (chief + justice)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Humanities and Social Sciences71%

Selected Abstracts

Duty and Justice at "Every Man's Door": The Grand Jury Charges of Chief Justice John Jay, 1790,1794

JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY, Issue 3 2006
JOHN P. KAMINSKI
"It is the Fortune of few to chuse their Situation,it is the Duty & Interest of all to accommodate themselves to the one which Providence chuses for them."1 So said John Jay, Chief Justice of the United States. Duty was paramount in the lives of Jay and many of his contemporaries of the founding generation. [source]

Unlikely Abolitionist: William Cushing and the Struggle Against Slavery

JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY, Issue 2 2004
Harry Downs
Introduction One of the striking differences between the federal Union established under the Constitution and the Confederation of States established under the Articles of Confederation is the creation under Article III of a judicial power of the United States and of a Supreme Court to exercise that power. Acting pursuant to its power to determine the structure of that Court, Congress determined that the Court should consist of one Chief Justice and five Associate Justices. The six lawyers President Washington named to the Court1 were leading members of the bar, yet none achieved lasting distinction by reason of his service on the Court. Chief Justice Jay, for example, is best remembered for the treaty with England which bears his name; and when he resigned in 1795 following his election as Governor of New York, local papers referred to his new office as "a promotion."2 [source]

Remarks on the 200th Anniversary of the Accession of John Marshall as Chief Justice

JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY, Issue 3 2002
Louis H. Pollak
[source]

Citizens, Consumers and Courts

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, Issue 4 2001
J.J. Spigelman
Address by the Honourable JJ Spigelman AC, Chief Justice of New South Wales, to the International Conference on Regulation Reform Management and Scrutiny of Legislation, New South Wales State Parliament House, Sydney, on 9 July 2001. [source]

The Supreme Court in the Nineteenth Century

JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY, Issue 1 2002
William H. Rehnquist
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, we find a Court which has not yet found its role, and whose principal impact is deciding which litigant wins in a particular lawsuit. Chief Justice John Marshall, appointed in 1801, changes that; he and his successor, Roger B. Taney, are the dominant figures in the Courts over which they preside. From 1801 until 1864-sixty-three years-the nation had only two Chief Justices; during the same time, it had fifteen presidents. In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the Chief Justices are less dominant and influential, sharing their authority with several notable Associate Justices. By the end of the century, the Court is beginning to wrestle with the many problems facing the nation after a little more than a century of existence. [source]

Pierson v. Post: A Great Debate, James Kent, and the Project of Building a Learned Law for New York State

LAW & SOCIAL INQUIRY, Issue 2 2009
Angela Fernandez
Pierson v. Post (1805) has long puzzled legal teachers and scholars. This article argues that the appellate report was the product of the intellectual interests (and schooling) of the lawyers and judges involved in the case. They converted a minor dispute about a fox into a major argument in order to argue from Roman and other civil law sources on how to establish possession in wild animals, effectively crafting an opportunity to create new law for New York State. This article explores the possibility that the mastermind behind this case was the chief justice of the court at the time, James Kent. The question of Kent's involvement in 1805 remains elusive. However, the article uses annotations he made on his copy of the case and discussion of Pierson v. Post in his famous Commentaries to demonstrate the nature of his later interest and to explore the project of building a learned law for New York State. [source]

Using Affective Attitudes to Identify Christian Fundamentalism: The Ten Commandments Judge and Alabama Politics

POLITICS & POLICY, Issue 5 2010
THOMAS SHAW
This article develops a new and useful indicator to aid in identifying Christian fundamentalism. "Affect" measures individuals' affective attitudes toward the role of Christian fundamentalists in Alabama politics. We demonstrate the analytic utility of this indicator by quantitatively comparing it to other more traditional and direct measures of fundamentalism, such as belief in the Bible as the literal word of God, self-identification as a fundamentalist, and whether one considers oneself to be "born again." We then compare the utility of these different measures of Christian fundamentalism in explaining electoral support for the archetype Christian fundamentalist political candidate, the "Ten Commandments Judge" Roy Moore, former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. We find that our affect indicator compares well to other measures of fundamentalism and actually outperforms all of the more traditional measures in explaining support for Moore. Data used in the analysis come from a public opinion poll conducted by the USA Polling Group in April 2006. Este artículo desarrolla un nuevo y útil indicador para ayudar a identificar el fundamentalismo cristiano. "Afecto" mide las actitudes afectivas de los individuos hacia el rol de los cristianos fundamentalistas en la política de Alabama. Demostramos la utilidad analítica de este indicador al compararlo cuantitativamente con otras medidas más tradicionales y directas del fundamentalismo, tales como la creencia de la Biblia como la palabra literal de Dios, auto-identificación como fundamentalista, y si uno se considera a uno mismo "nacido de nuevo." Después comparamos la utilidad de estas diferentes medidas del fundamentalismo cristiano para explicar el apoyo electoral al candidato político cristiano fundamentalista arquetípico: Roy Moore, "Juez de los Diez Mandamientos," ex-presidente del tribunal de la Corte Suprema de Alabama. Encontramos que nuestro indicador Afecto se equipara con otras medidas del fundamentalismo y en realidad supera a todas las más tradicionales mediciones que explican el apoyo a Moore. La información utilizada en el análisis proviene de una encuesta de opinión pública realizada por el USA Polling Group en Abril del 2006. [source]