header-logo header-logo

At sixes & sevens

18 November 2020 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 7911 / Categories: Features , International justice , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
32374
Athelstane Aamodt reflects on ‘originalist’ Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment to the US Supreme Court

The recent confirmation of the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court of the United States has aroused much controversy. Appointments to the Supreme Court always do, not least because of the great power that the Court possesses, ie it can strike down legislation as being unconstitutional. The view is that the appointment of Barrett gives the court a 6-3 bias in favour of ‘originalists’, judges who interpret the meaning of the US constitution as it would have been understood at the time it was promulgated. This point of view, which is conservative, tends to produce judgments that Republicans approve of, although that is not always the case.

The big fear of Democrats, who are largely pro-choice, is that the decision in the case of Roe v Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973), which established a woman’s right to abortion, will be overturned. Such is that fear that President-elect Joe Biden has said he would

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll