header-logo header-logo

US Supreme Court: Dissenting adults

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll