Balkinization   |
Balkinization
Balkinization Symposiums: A Continuing List                                                                E-mail: Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu David Luban david.luban at gmail.com Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts A Holiday Puzzle for Supreme Court Trivia Fans
|
Sunday, December 25, 2011
A Holiday Puzzle for Supreme Court Trivia Fans
Mark Tushnet
There's (at least) one Supreme Court case in which nine justices participated, and the Court announced that it was equally divided. Name the case and explain the outcome. (The case involved multiple issues, but the puzzle doesn't arise, at least directly, from one of the standard paradoxes of aggregation of votes on multiple issues.)
Comments:
You're probably thinking of Connecticut v Johnson, 460 US 73 (1983), in which an equally divided court affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Connecticut, with Justice Stevens concurring. The affirming plurality would dismiss certain convictions because the trial court's jury instructions were erroneous and not harmless. Justice Stevens would dismiss the writ as improvidently granted—as the harmless error issue raised no federal question—but agreed to affirm so that judgment could be entered.
Another option would be US v Jordan, 342 US 911 (1952), in which an equally divided court affirmed the judgment of the Sixth Circuit, with Justice Frankfurter concluding separately that the writ should be dismissed as improvidently granted. Given your prompt, however, I suspect Jordan isn't the case you're thinking of.
The case I have in mind is more puzzling than these. You can tell from the printed opinions what happened in these cases, but not in the one I have in mind. When I described the case to my wife, she said that one of the justices must have been of two minds about the case. And a law review comment wondered (paraphrasing to make locating the source more difficult) whether one of the justices had been split in two inside the conference room and reassembled before the justices emerged.
One final clue: "My" case has been cited by the Supreme Court 365 times, according to Lexis. (Johnson, which was part of Justice Frankfurter's campaign against hearing fact-specific tort cases, has never been cited by the Court.) The most recent citation of my case was in 2011, more than seventy years after it was decided.
COLEMAN v. MILLER.
Dealt with the second attempt to ratify the Child Labor Amendment in Kansas. The Supreme Court held the question of a second attempt to ratify after a span of years was a political question. It evenly split on the judiciability of the lieutenant governor splitting a tie in the state senate, the question being if he was a member of the "legislature" for Art. V purposes. Query if a justice might have disqualified himself on this specific issue for some reason, such as knowing the person or something.
Joe has the right case. The explanation is different(and to the extent that I've found evidence, it's not conclusive). Frankfurter told an anecdote to the effect that the Justices thought until late in the writing that they would be able to dispose of the case without reaching a conclusion on the lieutenant governor issue. But, right at the end, they realized that they had to say something about that issue. But,McReynolds had left for his vacation by then, and no one wanted to try to get him back. So, Hughes let the issue be decided by an evenly divided Court. (The problem with this is that it's hard to figure out why they thought they didn't have to reach that issue when they were reaching two others on the merits, with four justices acceding to Hughes's views on those issues, but apparently unwilling to do so on this one.)
This was a great post for a holiday change of pace, i.e., not too constitutionally adversarial. I hope Prof. Tushnet posts more frequently, however, on some of the adversarial aspects. In another thread at this Blog, I referenced the Winter 2011 issue of Constitutional Commentary with its Symposium on "The United States Constitution (rev. ed.) How would you rewrite the United States Constitution?" which includes Prof. Tushnet's submission "Abolishing Judicial Review" which focuses on the role of the Court with acts of Congress. Girardeau Spann's submission "Constitutional Hypocrisy" took a broader approach on abolishing judicial review. With the ongoing battles between originalists and non-originalist, I find the subject of judicial review interesting as it is not specified in Article III or elsewhere in the Constitution. Prof. Spann states in his Introduction: "There are, of course, practical problems entailed in 'rewriting' a Constitution to eliminate a provision that never actually appears in the Constitution ...." (p.558) And of course judicial review leads to judicial supremacy of the Court over the President and Congress even though Article III and the rest of the Constitution do not specifically provide for such supremacy.
So I hope Prof. Tushnet, and others, will post on judicial review/supremacy from time to time at this Blog, whether with or without accommodating comments.
Taking the FF explanation at face value, McReynolds voiced his opinion on that other issue (dissenting) while in effect being absent for the settling of the l.g. issue (so the "nine justices participated" is a bit of a trick question).
It is a curious result especially since the amendment was only ratified by 28 states, even counting Kansas. I don't see why, except for perhaps Hughes efficiency, they could have not delayed the decision until a full court was there. A bit of trivia mixed with trying to pull one over perhaps.
Great article. I merely found your blog along with planned to declare i get genuinely liked looking at your blog blogposts.
Who wrote the sonnet of seaside romance? Guess Shakespeare would feel wordless at the sight of marine motif lace wedding dress. Amber’s beach simple wedding dresses unfold pictures of sea-inspired details like pearl beading, shelly appliqué and metallic embroidery. A profusion of drapes, bubbles, pleating and ruffling echoes to the very physique of the beach and the sea.
Bennett Boskey, who was a Justice Reed law clerk (1940-41) and then CJ Stone's chief law clerk (1941-43), mentioned the Coleman decision as follows in 2006: "Sometimes [CJ] Hughes would accept things in his opinions, in order to get an opinion that became
the opinion of the Court with the maximum number of Justices, that looked absolutely unbelievable. Some looked as if they were in conflict with something else in his opinion. But that didn’t bother Hughes as much as the problem of getting a united opinion of the Court. There’s one opinion of Hughes, for example, in a voting rights case in which nine Justices voted, on which Hughes said as to a particular issue, the Court 'is equally divided.' Harry Shulman, who was then the Dean of the Yale Law School, wrote an article about this entitled Sawing a Justice in Half." That article, to which Mark referred, is Note, Sawing a Justice in Half, 48 YALE L.J. 1455 (1939).
Thanks Mr. Barrett for the cite.
Marty Lederman has a new post up and refuses to have comments. I went to Opinio Juris, where he refers us for extended discussion, and the second post has one comment and then it seems comments were cut off. The matter is complex and deserves some discussion [and back in the day, we would have some here] but Mr. Lederman unfortunately is taking the Balkin approach of talking to himself. I'm sorry for the non-germane post and happy new year and thanks to those here who still finds it productive to allow comments.
The cite for Boskey's comment, which I quoted above, is "Recollections of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette," 81 St. John's Law Review 755, 786-87 (Fall 2007).
The second article cited is also interesting and has this ancedote:
I later found out through Felix Frankfurter what had really happened in that case. Justice McReynolds, who was a very ornery Justice, used to go off a little bit early before the end of the Term on vacation. And in this particular case, the point involved was a new point that came up after Justice McReynolds had gone off on vacation. And nobody was going to try and call him back - he would have told them, frankly, "Go to hell." He wouldn't have come back. So Hughes just said, "On this issue, the Court is evenly divided." But, the LG issue was addressed by the state court, so was not really "new," except perhaps that the justices didn't think they had to decide the issue or forgot about it. Another tidbit in the law review article is the interesting story about how the lower court in the second flag salute case in effect predicted the Supreme Court would change its mind on the issue.
Thank you for your great post.I also like Mark Tushnats comment.I think attorney cleveland tn is always best.
Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Agen Judi Online Terpercaya
Tái định cư Thông tin Chung cư 360 Giải Phóng. Tổ hợp thương mại Chung cư Quận Ba Đình. Khu thương mại của Chung cư Quận Cầu Giấy. Lựa chọn đúng khi mua Chung cư Hà Nội.của đơn vị chủ đầu tư uy tín.Tầng hầm để xe của Chung cư Quận Đống Đa. Khu nhà ở của cư dân Chung cư Quận Hà Đông . Giới thiệu dự án bất động sản Chung cư Quận Hai Bà Trưng. Căn hộ đẳng cấp tiện nghi Chung cư Quận Hoàn Kiếm . Cuộc sống tiện nghi tại Chung cư Quận Hoàng Mai. Bàn giao căn hộ cho khách hang mua Chung cư Quận Long Biên . Tiến độ xây Phú Mỹ Complex. nhanh chóng. Tiện ích có tại Lạc Hồng Complex. hiện đại. Chung cư Thương mại tại Hà Nội như Chung cư Quận Tây Hồ . Bất động sản vip Chung cư quận Thanh Xuân. Bao gồm 4 tòa nhà cao 40 tầng Chung cư quận Từ Liêm. Tổng cộng có 440 căn hộ tại Dự án Cao cấp Vinhomes Liễu Giai. VÀ cả khu thấp tầng với 100 căn hộ có Vị trí Vinhomes Mễ Trì . Nếu có thời gian hãy tới trung tâm thành phố hà nội để xem dự án có Vị trí Biệt thự Dương nội. Nơi đây còn có cả nhiều tiện ích cực khủng như trường học Vị trí Green Life City. Chuẩn bị bàn giao nhà những dự án có Vị trí Dự án Cư xá Cienco 5
ngày bán ra Vị trí Chung cư CT36 Định Công. Dòng sản phẩm chung cư - Biệt thự - Liền kề ở phía đường Hồ Tùng Mậu Vị trí Chung cư Goldmark City . Nếu khách hang muốn đầu tư Bất động sản hãy tới Địa điểm Chung cư Goldseason . Nhiều người tìm kiếm cơ hội đầu tư ở Số nhà Chung cư Vinhomes Cầu Giấy đây là bất động sản cao cấp tại Hà nội . Vị trí Chung cư 36 Phạm Hùng được cho là khu vực phát triển nhất hiện nay. Tọa độ Liền kề Vinhomes Gardenia nhu cầu của khách hang sinh sống tại khu vực chung cư cao cấp ngày càng cao do đóĐịa điểm Chung cư cao cấp đang được xây dựng với tốc độ cực kỳ nhanh. Tầng Trung tâm thương mại Thông tin Shophouse Park Hill Times City được bố trí tại tầng 1. Cư dân sống tại Tòa nhà Helios Tower Tam Trinh có một môi trường hoàn hảo. chia sẻ cách mua Chung cư 259 Yên Hòa Condominium | nhà đất Chung cư Tràng An | dịch vụ nhà đất Dự án Chung cư Hà Đông | Tổng hợp Chung cư Quận Cầu Giấy | Giới thiệu Chung cư Quận Thanh Xuân | truyền thong Chung cư Quận Từ Liêm | đất đai Chung cư Quận Hoàng Mai | nhà đất Chung cư Quận Đống Đa | thong tin mới Chung cư Quận Long Biên | tin tức chung Chung cư Quận Tây Hồ | Tổng quan về UDIC Complex | tổng quan sơ lược Chung cư Quận Ba Đình | giới thiệu chung chung UDIC Riverside | Dự án hiếm hoi Chung cu 199 Ho Tung Mau | bất động sản nghỉ dưỡng Horizon Tower | nhà tái định cư Hanoi Center Point |
Post a Comment
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) David Pozen, The Constitution of the War on Drugs (Oxford University Press, 2024) Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin’s Press, 2022) Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |