U.S. Supreme Court – Page 60 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Best of the Blogs

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:August 1, 2010
Post category:Civil Procedure Federalism Labor & Employment Law U.S. Supreme Court

Is American law too complex? PrawfsBlawg featured an interesting exchange on this question last week. Eric Johnson initiated the exchange with this post, in which he observed:

There is a huge, obvious problem with the law. The bar studiously ignores it. Even the legal academy generally pretends it’s not there. It’s so large as to be beyond overwhelming.

The problem is this: Our system of justice is absurdly complex and time consuming.

. . .

There are three basic aspects to the mess: Endeavoring to understand the law is unduly complex and expensive, determining the facts is unduly complex and expensive, and teeing up the law and the facts for judges and juries is unduly complex and expensive.

In addition to a lively string of comments (including a couple by our own Rick Esenberg), Eric’s comments also prompted a thoughtful responsive post by Paul Horwitz.

Study Reveals Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection

Post author:Melissa Longamore
Post published:July 20, 2010
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Milwaukee U.S. Supreme Court Wisconsin Criminal Law & Process

Last month, the Equal Justice Initiative (EJI) released a study, “Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection: A Continuing Legacy,” which revealed a prevalence of racial bias in jury selection in the South. The report stands as the most comprehensive study of racial discrimination in jury selection since 1986, when the US Supreme Court sought to limit the practice in the landmark case Batson v. Kentucky.

Racial discrimination in jury selection first became illegal when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875. Despite federal legislation, people of color continue to be excluded from jury service because of their race, especially in serious criminal trials and death penalty cases.

Evidence suggests the phenomenon persists through the use of peremptory challenges. A peremptory challenge essentially provides attorneys the ability to exclude a certain number of potential jurors without explanation of their removal.

“Past Formalities” and “Present Realities”: Why Wendy Isn’t a Parent at All

Post author:Taylor Barnes
Post published:July 19, 2010
Post category:Constitutional Interpretation Family Law Federal Law & Legal System U.S. Supreme Court Wisconsin Civil Litigation Wisconsin Court System Wisconsin Law & Legal System

On June 24^th, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruled against a woman seeking legal recognition of her parental rights for the two children she adopted with her ex-partner. The two women adopted their children in 2002 and 2004 from Guatemala. The woman appealing, known in the record as Wendy, stayed at home with the children, while her partner, recorded as Liz, worked as an attorney. Liz was the legal adoptive parent so that the children could be on her healthcare plan. When the couple split up, the two women agreed to an informal custodial arrangement, but Wendy has no legal rights over or to her children. When Liz stopped allowing Wendy to see the children, Wendy lacked any legal recourse.

Wisconsin law does not permit same-sex couples adoptive rights; only one parent is the “legal parent.” The court justified its decision on the basis that Wisconsin law defines a “parent” as only the biological or adoptive parent. Wendy is neither of these and thus, at least under the law, not a parent at all.

This leads to questions that are more cultural than legal (though still legal, yes). How do we define parent? How do we define family? The Supreme Court has spoken to these questions, though not in the terms at issue here.