Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
State courts often have diverse names and structures, as illustrated below. State courts hear about 98% of litigation; most states have courts of special jurisdiction, which typically handle minor disputes such as traffic citations, and courts of general jurisdiction responsible for more serious disputes. [1]
Walzer argues in favour of an idea he calls "complex equality", and against the view that goods with different meaning and content can be lumped together into the larger category of primary goods, as is advocated by John Rawls, in his A Theory of Justice (1971). According to Walzer, each sphere has its own internal logic and should be governed ...
Since the Supreme Court was established in 1789, 116 people have served on the Court. The length of service on the Court for the 107 non-incumbent justices ranges from William O. Douglas's 36 years, 209 days to John Rutledge's 1 year, 18 days as associate justice and, separated by a period of years off the Court, his 138 days as chief justice.
The longest serving chief justice was John Marshall, with a tenure of 12,570 days (34 years, 152 days). John Rutledge, who served on the court twice, was both the shortest serving associate justice, with a tenure of 383 days (1 year, 18 days), and the shortest serving chief justice, with a tenure of 138 days (4 months 16
The theory posits that inequalities in several spheres of society should not invade one another. [3] Walzer's definition of complex equality is: "In formal terms, complex equality means that no citizen's standing in one sphere or with regard to one social good can be undercut by his standing in some other sphere, with regard to some other good."
The chief justice always ranks first in the order of precedence—regardless of the length of their service. [172] The associate justices are then ranked by the length of their service. The chief justice sits in the center on the bench, or at the head of the table during conferences. The other justices are seated in order of seniority.
[6] Suja A. Thomas argues the federal judiciary has taken most of the constitutionally-defined power from juries in the United States for itself [7] thanks in part to the influence of legal elites and companies that prefer judges over juries [8] as well as the inability of the jury to defend its power. [9]
To further discern the justices' ideological leanings, researchers have carefully analyzed the judicial rulings of the Supreme Court—the votes and written opinions of the justices—as well as their upbringing, their political party affiliation, their speeches, their political contributions before appointment, editorials written about them at the time of their Senate confirmation, the ...