|
|  |
Washington University in St. Louis News & Information > News Topics > Law & Legal Issues >
Supreme Court
Faculty members at Washington University School of Law closely watch the Supreme Court's docket and are prepared to talk about the Court's upcoming cases and decisions. As part of their review of the Supreme Court, faculty members at the School of Law are part of the Supreme Court Forecasting Project, a group of researchers that generate predictions for every case heard by the Court.
| Faculty Experts: |
Showing 4 Supreme Court Experts.
|
|
Neil M. Richards
Associate Professor of Law
 |
| Richards |
Richards is available to comment on issues related to the Supreme Court, the First Ammendment, privacy law, and Constitutional law. A former law clerk for Chief Justice of the United States William H. Rehnquist, Richards' research focuses on present-day and historical questions of free speech and privacy ...
Expertise: Constitutional law, First Amendment, Supreme Court and the Constitution, privacy law, press and the Constitution
Direct contact: (314) 935-4794
/
nmrichards@wulaw.wustl.edu
|
Bruce La Pierre
Professor of Law
 |
| La Pierre |
La Pierre's research and writing has focused on campaign finance reform, desegration and civil rights issues. He served as the special master in the St. Louis School desegregation case decided and managed by the United States District Court, Eastern District of Missouri. He wrote about his experiences ...
Expertise: constitutional law, desegregation, civil rights, campaign finance
Direct contact: (314) 935-6477
/
lapierre@wulaw.wustl.edu
|
Jack Knight
Sidney W. Souers Professor of Government in Arts & Sciences
Knight's research interest are modern social and political theory; law and legal theory; political economy; and philosophy of social science. Publications include Institutions and Social Conflict (Cambridge University Press, 1992) and Explaining Social Institutions (with Itai Sened) (The University ...
Expertise: modern social and political theory, formal theory, legal theory, political economy, political science, government, social thought and analysis
Direct contact: (314) 935-4343
/
knight@artsci.wustl.edu
|
Pauline Kim
John S. Lehmann Research Professor and Professor of Law
Kim specializes in employment law,employment discrimination law, the litigation process and the role of the courts. She teaches courses in civil procedure, employment law and pretrial practice and procedure. Kim is one of the researchers on the Supreme Court Forecasting Project and one of the co-founders ...
Expertise: civil procedure, employment law, pretrial procedure, racial discrimination in employment, sexual discrimination in employment, disability discrimination, employment discrimination law, …
Direct contact: (314) 935-8570
/
kim@wulaw.wuatl.edu
|
Showing 4 Supreme Court Experts.
|
|
| News Stories & Tip Sheets: |
Showing Supreme Court Stories 1 through 3 of 29.
- Show More |
|
Civil rights & science at Assembly Series
Programs to feature Charles Ogletree and Philip Clayton
Feb. 22,
2008 -- The Assembly Series hosts two speakers back to back: Legendary civil rights pioneer Charles Ogletree will present his views on the Roberts court at noon on Tuesday, March 4, in the Bryan Cave Moot Courtroom, Anheuser-Busch Hall.
Philip Clayton will give a talk on bridging the gap between science and religion at 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, March 5 in Whitaker Hall Auditorium.
|
Courts still trusted?
Protecting free speech of state judicial candidates has not hurt court legitimacy
July 31,
2007 --
 |
| Gibson |
A 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision protecting the right of judicial candidates to speak freely about controversial issues opened the door for state judicial election campaigns to become increasingly nasty, bitter and politicized. However, the Court's decision has not directly damaged the court system's legitimacy in the eyes of citizens, suggests a new study from Washington University in St. Louis.
|
Another brick from the wall
Supreme Court ruling on patents is step in right direction, economists contend
May 1,
2007 -- The Supreme Court's decision April 30 to raise the bar for patents on products combining elements of pre-existing inventions is a landmark in the battle against so-called "nuisance patents" and just one more sign that the tide is turning against overly restrictive and costly intellectual property right protections, suggests a pair of economists from Washington University in St. Louis.
|
Showing Supreme Court Stories 1 through 3 of 29.
- Show More |
|
California prisons uneasily prepare to desegregate cells
Wall Street Journal
March 22,
2006 -- Prison culture dictates that inmates stick with their own kind, associating almost exclusively with other inmates from their race or ethnic group, defending them to the death if necessary. And that is why prison officials, inmates and scholars are uneasy as California's prison system prepares to introduce a formal policy desegregating its double cells, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that prisoners may not be routinely segregated in cells by race. The ruling has ramifications for state correctional systems nationwide.
WUSTL law professor Margo Schlanger, who specializes in incarceration litigation, comments.
|
High court's recent changes may be just first act
Wall Street Journal
Feb. 1,
2006 -- Changes are ahead for the Supreme Court, whose membership held stable from the 1994 appointment of Justice Stephen Breyer through last year, which brought Justice O'Connor's announced retirement and the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. WUSTL political science professor Andrew Martin, who co-authored a statistical analysis on the justices voting record, comments.
|
Bush has hits, misses in annual speech
CBS News online
and 32 others
Jan. 27,
2006 -- WUSTL presidential rhetoric specialist Wayne Fields comments on President Bush's annual State of the Union address and looks back on his previous speeches.
|
The High-Court Battle That Never Was
Wall Street Journal
Jan. 18,
2006 -- The only step left in the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito looks to be the vote, raising the question of what happened to the much anticipated struggle over high-court nominees.
Foremost among a number of forces that drained some electricity from the fight was a bipartisan agreement among a group of 14 mostly centrist senators. That changed the dynamic of judicial debates, moving the Senate decisively away from a confrontation over judicial selections such as the one that paralyzed the chamber in the spring of 2005.
WUSTL political science professor Steven Smith comments.
|
Supreme Court allows disabled Georgia inmate to proceed with suit against state
The New York Times
Jan. 11,
2006 -- WUSTL law professor Samuel Bagenstos, comments on a case he argued in front of the Supreme Court. In the case, a paraplegic prison inmate sued the State of Georgia under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Supreme Court, in its first federalism decision since John Roberts became chief justice, ruled that Congress acted within its constitutional authority when it stripped states of immunity from some suits for damages by disabled prison inmates.
|
How focus on Roe pushes aside other court issues
Chicago Tribune
and 15 others
Dec. 30,
2005 -- Article on the legacy of the 1973 Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision, that has reshaped the nation's political parties and has been a core issue in everything from school board to presidential elections for a generation. It has become the ultimate touchstone, a ready form of shorthand, in the ongoing conflict over culture and values throughout America. And for the last two decades, at least, it has come to consume Supreme Court confirmation proceedings as well. WUSTL law and political science professor Lee Epstein comments.
|
Roberts court hears its first case in federalism debate
New York Times and Washington Post
Nov. 10,
2005 -- The case of a disabled Georgia prisoner is one of the most important states' rights case facing the court this year and will further define how the disabilities act is applied throughout the nation.
WUSTL law professor Samuel Bagenstos. who was representing the inmate, comments.
|
Ideology serves as a wild card on court pick
New York Times
and 1 others
Nov. 4,
2005 -- Democrats admit that Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito has the qualifications to serve. They plan to assess Judge Alito on ideological grounds. WUSTL law and political science professor Lee Epstein comments.
|
Bush choice gets criticisms rare for nominees to Court
The New York Times
and 2 others
Oct. 24,
2005 -- Though past nominees have faced swift opposition, what makes Ms. Miers's nomination extraordinary, historians say, is the combination of doubts about her philosophy from within the president's own party and attacks on her legal qualifications from both sides of the aisle. ''Harriet Miers is in a real danger zone,'' said Lee Epstein, a political scientist at WUSTL who uses statistical models to study public perceptions of past Supreme Court nominees. The questions about her qualifications, Epstein said, are what make Ms. Miers's nomination ''reasonably unique.''
|
If Approved, a First-Time Judge, Yes, but Hardly the First in Court's History
New York Times
Oct. 4,
2005 -- WUSTL law and political science professor Lee Epstein comments on the nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court.
|
Next Debate: Must Future Court Nominees Match Qualifications of Roberts?
The New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Baltimore Sun, Chicago Tribune
and 16 others
Sept. 19,
2005 -- As the Senate Judiciary Committee prepares for its vote on Thursday on Judge Roberts's nomination to be the nation's 17th chief justice, Democrats and Republicans agree on one thing: he will be a tough act to follow. Both sides say the next nominee will clearly have to answer at least as many questions as Judge Roberts did. Lee Epstein, a professor of law and political science at WUSTL, said despite the protestations of Democrats that Judge Roberts was not open and direct, senators on both sides extracted much information from him.
|
Will Roberts move left?
San Francisco Chronicle
Sept. 6,
2005 -- Judging John Roberts from his record, his writings and the near-unanimous opinion of both supporters and opponents, the Supreme Court nominee is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative whose confirmation would tilt the court further to the right. But is it conceivable that within Roberts' chest, waiting to emerge within a few years under the mysterious influence of serving on the high court, beats the heart of a closet moderate? Lee Epstein, a professor of law and political science at Washington University in St. Louis and coauthor of the forthcoming book "Advice and Consent: The Politics of Judicial Appointments," said justices usually reflect the philosophies of the presidents who appointed them, particularly in their first five to 10 years on the court.
|
Why George Bush Is Smiling About John G. Roberts
Bloomberg.com
July 29,
2005 -- WUSTL political science professor Lee Epstein comments on the strategy behind Bush's nomination of John Roberts for the Supreme Court. Beyond the single vote Roberts would get, he surely would become a persuasive force in garnering votes for his side, given his intellect, his affability and his intricate knowledge of the sitting judges.
|
Product is judge; market is America
Chicago Tribune
and 15 others
July 22,
2005 -- Article on the marketing of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. WUSTL American Culture Studies director and political rhetoric expert Wayne Fields comments on White House strategy.
|
Democrats Adopt O'Connor As Model for Bush Court Pick
New York Times and Houston Chronicle
July 7,
2005 -- Democrats and Republicans battle over the legacy of retiring Supreme Court Justice O'Connor, and over who should replace her. WUSTL political science and law professor Lee Epstein comments.
|
O'Connor's departure may swing court
Houston Chronicle
July 5,
2005 -- Experts discuss the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and what the future Supreme Court could look like as conservatives and liberals prepare for the political battle to come. WUSTL law and political science professor Lee Epstein, who is a co-author of a far-reaching study on the voting habits of Supreme Court justices, comments.
|
Court takes on question of seizing land
Associated Press Online, Wall Street Journal
and 20 others
Sept. 29,
2004 -- The Supreme Court agreed Sept. 28 to decide when local governments may seize people's homes and businesses against their will to make way for projects like shopping malls and hotel complexes that produce more tax revenue. Daniel Mandelker, professor of law, who specializes in land use, said towns have legitimate reasons to take property, but the high court should redefine their limits.
|
|
| |
|
Download
Show More Supreme Court Clips
Email this page
Print ready page