Judges

When rules of statutory interpretation change midstream

by

The evolution of statutory interpretation has significant implications for the judicial process, particularly as courts navigate complex legislative frameworks. Recent cases, such as FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd., illustrate the shifting methodologies that courts employ in interpreting statutes. This transition from a purposivist approach, which emphasized congressional intent, to a textualist framework that prioritizes the literal text of the law marks a notable change in legal practice. Shifts in Methodology: From Purposivism to Textualism Historically, courts often adopted a purposivist stance, where the intent and objectives behind legislation were paramount … Read more

Trump Administration Seeks Supreme Court Resolution on Immigration Judges’ Policy

by

In a continuing legal battle, the Trump administration has formally requested the Supreme Court’s intervention regarding the authority and operational procedures of immigration judges. This request marks the 32nd time since late January that the administration has sought emergency relief from the highest court in the United States. The core of the dispute revolves around a policy that restricts immigration judges from participating in official speaking engagements without prior approval, a matter that has significant implications for the judges’ First Amendment rights. Background of the Dispute The controversy began when the National Association of Immigration … Read more

What Can We Learn from the Supreme Court’s First Round of Oral Arguments?

by

The recent oral arguments presented before the Supreme Court have provided a unique window into the decision-making processes of the justices. As the court navigates complex legal issues, the focus appears to be on procedural nuances rather than sweeping legal precedents. This shift towards practical considerations may signal a more cautious approach in interpreting the law, prompting observers to ponder the implications for future cases and legal standards. Focus on Procedure Over Broad Legal Principles In the first round of oral arguments held in October, the justices demonstrated a keen interest in the procedural aspects … Read more

Being a Justice Doesn’t Make You a Policy Expert

by

The role of justices in the American judicial system has evolved significantly, particularly concerning their influence on policy-making. Despite their legal expertise, there is a growing concern about the adequacy of their understanding of complex policy issues. This disconnect raises important questions about the appropriateness of their involvement in shaping policy, given their primary function is to interpret the law rather than to create it. The Historical Context of Lawyers in Governance Historically, lawyers have played a prominent role in the formation of American governance. At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, nearly two-thirds of the … Read more