The Myth of Judicial Activism:
A book talk by
Kermit Roosevelt
Wednesday, April 09, 2007
150 HH, 12:20pm, Burritos Served
Please join us for a talk by Prof. Kermit Roosevelt about his recent book, The Myth of Judicial Activism: Making Sense of Supreme Court Decisions. Prof. Roosevelt works in a diverse range of fields, focusing on constitutional law and conflict of laws. His new book, The Myth of Judicial Activism, sets out standards by which citizens can determine whether the Supreme Court is abusing its authority.
Prof. Roosevelt has published in the Virginia Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, and the Columbia Law Review, among others, and he has written a novel as well, In the Shadow of the Law. Prof. Roosevelt co-authored a chapter on Internet filtering systems in Protecting Our Children on the Internet: Towards a New Culture of Responsibility. In connection with that work, he presented testimony on the future of filtering to the Congressional Commission on the Child Online Protection Act. Recently, Prof. Roosevelt presented “The Supreme Court in American Society ” at the National Constitution Center. He has twice received certificates of distinction from Harvard’s Derek Bok Center for Teaching.
For more information on Kermit Roosevelt's books, check out:
Populists in Action
March 22, 2007
Please join us for an afternoon symposium on direct democracy and initiative campaigns.
Direct democracy is a locus of state-level political activity with a national impact, and progressive issues and approaches to constitutional scholarship are potentially at stake with each campaign. This symposium will provide an opportunity to lay the groundwork for a continued dialogue about the progressive law, policy and politics of initiative campaigns.
Progressive Politics and Ballot Initiatives
12:20-1:20 PM, 218 Hutchins Hall
- Oliver Griswold, Communications and Outreach Director for the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center.
|
Scholars on Direct Democracy
1:30-2:25 PM, 116 Hutchins Hall
- Liz Gerber, Professor of Public Policy, University of Michigan.
- Bruce Cain, Professor, University of California, Berkeley.
|
Issue Panel & Michigan Panel
2:35 - 3:30 PM, 138 Hutchins Hall
- Mark Brewer, Michigan Democratic Party Chair.
- Mary Ellen Gurewitz, Michigan Democratic Party Counsel.
- Oliver Griswold, Communications and Outreach Director for the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center.
|
Reception
4:00-5:30 PM, 150 Hutchins Hall
Open to all!
|
For directions to the law school, please click here. For symposium speaker information, please click here.
Lunch Chat with a Supreme Court Advocate:
The Court Considers Filing Deadlines for Civil Rights Lawsuits Against False Arrests
Thursday, March 08, 2007
218 HH, 12:20pm, Food Served
Chicago attorney Ken Flaxman discusses his recent oral argument before the Supreme Court in Wallace v. Kato.
In Wallace, the Court considered when the statute of limitations begins to run for civil rights lawsuits seeking damages for false arrests that result in convictions that are later overturned.
For more information on Wallace v. Kato, check out:
Is Habeas Corpus Dead?
Tuesday, February 06, 2006
250 HH, 12:20pm, Food Served
Bob Gensburg, a Vermont attorney, talks about his work on a habeas corpus petition for one of the Guantanamo Bay detainees to be filed in US District Court in Washington.
The constitution holds that "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
Found in clause 2 of Section 9 of Article I of the United States Constitution. .
Habeas Corpus in the News:
How Can a Guy Be Grumpy About an 8-1 Win in His Supreme Court Debut?
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
218 HH, 12:20pm, Food Served
Professor Richard D. Friedman discusses his oral argument in Hammon v. Indiana this spring & the Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court.
The constitution holds that "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him."
U.S. Const. amend. VI.
In Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), the Supreme Court radically transformed the law in this area by adopting a "testimonial" approach,
which Professor Friedman had long advocated; he now maintains the Confrontation Blog (see link below),
to comment on related issues and developments, and he successfully argued a follow-up case,
Hammon v. Indiana, in the Supreme Court. Professor Friedman earned a B.A. and a J.D. from Harvard, where he was an editor of the Harvard Law Review, and
a D.Phil. in modern history from Oxford University. (Biographical info taken from Michigan Faculty Page, see link below)
For more information on Hammon & the companion case, Davis v. Washington, check out:
Ruchi Bhowmik
Monday, October 23, 2006
218 HH, 12:30 - 1:30 pm
Rachana "Ruchi" Bhowmik currently serves as Legislative Counsel to Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. She handles defense, judiciary, privacy, homeland security, and veterans' issues for the Senator.
Please join us for her presentation on The Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Ms. Bhowmik is a graduate of the University of Virginia, School of Law in Charlottesville, Virginia, and Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut.
For more information about the Military Commissions Act, see Professor Jack Balkin's blog Balkinization. While the following posts are particularly instructive, no reading is necessary to appreciate Ms. Bhowmik's presentation.
The National ACS organization held a Hill briefing on the MCA that can be accessed here.
