Federal Law & Legal System – Page 129 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Contract Rights Under Assault

Post author:Matthew Fernholz
Post published:January 16, 2010
Post category:Business Regulation Corporate Law Legal Ethics Negotiation Political Processes & Rhetoric President & Executive Branch

In 1789, as the inchoate American government was climbing out of the mountainous debt left over from the Revolutionary War, a thorny political problem emerged. While most of the chattering class was consumed with the debate over whether the states’ war debt should be federalized, another far more visceral controversy arose. Because the Continental Congress lacked funds during the war, the Revolution was funded partly by wealthy private citizens who invested in bonds. As a result of the lack of governmental money, many American soldiers were given worthless IOUs at the end of the war, as states scampered for a way to give the patriots their back pay. Many of these soldiers panicked, and sold their IOUs to speculators for as little as fifteen cents on the dollar. The problem was, once the federal government began repaying the debt, the value of the bonds soared. So who should get the money: the patriots who fought bravely for their country and only sold the IOUs because of fear they would get nothing from their government, or the speculators?

Seventh Circuit Weighs in on Crime-Lab Evidence

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:January 13, 2010
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Evidence Federal Criminal Law & Process Seventh Circuit

The Supreme Court was not the only court wrestling this week with the admissibility of crime-lab evidence. A day after the Justices heard oral argument in Briscoe v. Virginia, the Seventh Circuit decided United States v. Turner (No. 08-3109). Both cases put into question the vitality of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 129 S. Ct. 2527 (2009).

A jury convicted Turner of selling crack to an undercover police officer. The drugs were sent to the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory, where they were analyzed by a chemist named Hanson, who confirmed that they were indeed crack. The government intended to call Hanson to testify to this effect, but she went on maternity leave before the trial. So Hanson’s supervisor, Block, was summoned instead. Based on Hanson’s notes and data, Block testified that he agreed with her conclusion that the drugs were crack.

On appeal, Turner argued that Block’s testimony violated Melendez-Diaz.

New Study Adds to the Debate Surrounding Ideological Divides and the United States Supreme Court

Post author:Stephen Boyett
Post published:December 21, 2009
Post category:Judges & Judicial Process U.S. Supreme Court

The New York Times published an article detailing the results of a new study regarding the career paths of former United States Supreme Court clerks. The study finds that “former clerks have started to take jobs that reflect the ideologies of the justices for whom they worked.” The data collected show a shift in the career paths of clerks hired from 1990 and on:

Until about 1990, the study shows, there was no particular correlation between a justice’s ideological leanings and what his or her clerks did with their lives.

Clerks from conservative chambers are now less likely to teach. If they do, they are more likely to join the faculties of conservative and religious law schools. Republican administrations are now much more likely to hire clerks from conservative chambers, and Democratic administrations from liberal ones. Even law firm hiring splits along ideological lines.

It is no secret that the justices have shown a greater propensity to hire clerks that share their ideological beliefs (as the article and previous studies explain). Yet this newest study, which focuses on life post-clerkship, has alarmed those already worried about the strong ideological splits on the Court. Says law professor William Nelson of NYU, “It’s cause for concern mainly because it’s a further piece of evidence of the polarization of the court.”