Skip to main content

CRS Report Addresses Justice Scalia's Death, Implications for Supreme Court


Many of our readers are probably wondering how the death of Justice Antonin Scalia will affect the Supreme Court, and what to expect of the political battle already being waged over the nomination of his successor. A new “legal sidebar” report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides a brief summary of these issues. Here are a few takeaways:
  • With the loss of Justice Scalia, the Court loses perhaps its greatest champion of constitutional “originalism,” the theory that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the understanding of those who ratified the document in the 18th century.  
  • Justice Scalia’s absence could mean a four-to-four split in a number of cases involving high-profile issues such as abortion, immigration, and affirmative action. In the event of an even split, the Court can either affirm the lower court’s judgment (such a decision creates no binding national precedent), or schedule the case to be reargued after the vacancy is filled.
  • Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution provides that the President shall make appointments to the Supreme Court “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.” President Obama has stated that he plans to nominate a successor, but the confirmation process in the Senate may prove difficult. The CRS paper points out that very few Justices have been both nominated and confirmed in a presidential election year, the most recent example being Frank Murphy in 1940.
Future CRS reports will cover these issues in greater detail.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le...

This Day in Legal History -- Roy Cohn

Big lawyers have big personalities, and few had as big a personality as Roy Cohn who was born on this day in New York City in 1927. Cohn’s career was spent in the Washington DC—New York axis, famous in the press for his legal and social exploits, his list of famous and infamous clients, and as the poster-boy for every stereotype of the dishonest grasping lawyer. The legal career of Roy Cohn is an object lesson on the use, and abuse, of the lawyer’s power. Roy Cohn was born on February 20, 1927 in New York City. His father was a justice in the Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court and was well connected politically. These connections, along with a precocious intelligence which allowed him to graduate from Columbia law school at age 20, paved the way for a bright legal career. Cohn’s first job (after waiting until he turned 21 to be admitted to the bar) was as an assistant U.S. Attorney in New York. He first came to prominence in his role as a prosecutor in the Rosenberg espi...

The Bar Exam: Some History & Comparison

It's that time of year again...time for two to three days of squeezing out all the material that hopeful lawyers have been pounding into their heads over several months - the bar exam. To mark the occasion, here is a brief history of the exam itself, as well as a taste of what is required to become an attorney elsewhere. Prior to the mid-1800s, there were no written bar exams. Instead, the path to becoming a lawyer led hopefuls through "apprenticeships, self-directed reading, and oral examinations." The next phase made use of a diploma privilege, which remained until the ABA began requiring exams in the 1920s. (A diploma privilege does still exist in Wisconsin, however.) The first state to employ a written version of the bar exam was Massachusetts, in 1855. (See Riebe, A Bar Review for Law Schools: Getting Students on Board to Pass Their Bar Exams , 45 Brandeis L. J. 269 (2007) for quoted material and historical information.) Bar exams consisted only of essays until...