header-logo header-logo

11 June 2021 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7936 / Categories: Features , International justice , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

US Supreme Court: Dissenting adults

50769
Neil Parpworth provides a recent example of the US Supreme Court’s approach to the expression of dissent
  • Torres v Madrid: the facts; the legal issue; the authorities.

One of the means by which the success of a US presidency is sometimes determined is by having regard to the number of presidential nominees who have been installed in the Supreme Court during a president’s four-year tenure. Using this measure, Donald Trump’s presidency was a success in that three appointments to the highest court were secured, whereas Jimmy Carter’s presidency was a failure in that no new justices were appointed between 1977-1981.

However, given that justices are appointed for life, opportunities to appoint new members simply may not arise during a presidency so long as the incumbents remain fit and healthy and have no intention to retire. At the time of writing, six of the justices have been appointed under a Republican presidency and only three under a Democrat presidency. This imbalance is of course important given the nature

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll