Judicial

• Judicial elections

• Judicial reviews

• Judicial candidates

• Section 2: Judicial Power and Jurisdiction

• Constitution of the United States (Annotated)

• Judicial Review

§ 17.1 Foundations of . § 17.1.1 The Nature and Basis of . § 17.1.2 During the Original Natural Law Era: 1789-1873. § 17.1.2.1 Marbury v. Madison versus the Tripartite Theory of . § 17.1.2.2 Martin v. Hunter's Lessee and Federal Court Supremacy. § 17.1.3.1 During the Formalist Era: 1873-1937. § 17.1.3.2 During the Holmesian Era: 1937-1954. § 17.1.3.3 During the Instrumentalist Era: 1954-1986. § 17.1.3.4 During the Modern Natural Law Era: 1986-Today. § 17.1.4 Evaluation of . § 17.2 The Jurisdiction of the Federal Courts. § 17.2.1 Federal Jurisdiction: What Article III Provides. § 17.2.2 Types of Cases for Which Federal Jurisdiction Exists. § 17.2.2.1...

• The Path of Constitutional Law

• Section 1: Judicial Power, Courts, Judges

• Constitution of the United States (Annotated)

• Impeachment As Judicial Selection?

[...] it is not for life if the judge misbehaves - or at least opponents can make a plausible argument to that effect - and Congress removes the jurist, or at least threatens to remove the judge.5 In such a case "judicial selection" might encompass the tactical use of impeachment to deselect judges. In Part I, this Article frames the phenomenon of impeachment as judicial selection as a tactic of constitutional hardball, i.e., the framework suggested by Professor Mark Tushnet for understanding how parties or movements secure rapid change between constitutional orders.6 Part I also discusses several of the prominent instances of resort to this tactic, including the Jeffersonian, Nixonian, and Christian Coalition impeachments or threats of impeachment. [...] as to the grounds for impeach...

• The William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal
• Vol. 18 Nbr. 3, March 2010

• District Attorney's Office for Third Judicial Dist. v. Osborne, 557 U. S. (2009)

SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2008 DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR THIRD JUDICIALDIST. V. OSBORNE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DIST...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Judicial Review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board Decisions

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes new rules of practice to implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act that provide for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). The proposed rules would provide a consolidated set of rules relating to Board trial practice for inter partes review, post-grant review, the transitional program for covered business method patents, and derivation proceedings. The proposed rules would also provide a consolidated set of rules to implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act related to seeking judicial review of Board decisions.

• Federal Register Nbr. 77 FR 6879, February 09, 2012
• Proposed rules
• Patent and Trademark Office

• Judicial Power

• Georgia Constitution

• Abolishing judicial review.

PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT: The constitutionality of acts of Congress shall not be reviewed by any court in the United States. (2) COMMENTA...

• Constitutional Commentary
• Vol. 27 Nbr. 3, December 2011

• Super deference, the science obsession, and judicial review as translation of agency science.

When courts review agencies' scientific and technical determinations, they often emphasize that the specialized subject matter requires them to be at ...

• Michigan Law Review
• Vol. 109 Nbr. 5, March 2011

• W. Bush's Judicial Legacy: Mission Accomplished

[...] any lame duck president is unlikely to enjoy the cache to press forward with large numbers of nominees when the Senate is controlled by the opposition party hopeful of winning the presidency in the upcoming election and enjoying its judicial spoils. The level of distrust between Senate Democrats and the Bush White House escalated to the point that during the 110th Congress, the Senate refused to recess lest the President make recess appoinunents. [...] the Senate was in continuous pro forma session over the major holidays and the customary August recess.

• Judicature
• Vol. 92 Nbr. 6, May 2009