Anthony Kennedy

Legal%20Eagle%20Wedding%20Watch%20NYT%20wedding%20announcements%20Above%20the%20Law.jpg
Apart from our three finalist couples, there isn’t much to highlight for you this week: just some minor WGWAG action, and, in the Vows column, a nice shout-out to LEWW’s temporary home city.
So without further ado, we bring you our fabulous finalists:

1. Nykeesha Davis and Chad Peterman
2. Deborah Bernstein and David Foster
3. Ellen Bradford and Todd McIntosh

More about these couples, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Legal Eagle Wedding Watch 07.22.07: Seeds of Love”

Sign up for the Above the Law newsletter

Subscribe to our free daily email and get breaking news, commentary, and opinions on law firms, lawyers, law schools, lawsuits, judges, and more.

Anthony Kennedy Justice Anthony M Kennedy Above the Law blog.jpgSome helpful tipsters reminded us: today is the birthday of [swing] Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. Happy Birthday, Justice Kennedy!
We asked one reader, aspiring lawyer Andrew Cohen,* for thoughts on writing up a short post. His response:

“You don’t. You write a ridiculously long post that both praises and denigrates him, pretending to come out clearly one way or another, but writing so murkily that no one can tell how you actually feel.”

And let’s throw in some flowery rhetoric, too. Considering that it’s AMK’s birthday, a shout-out to the “mystery of life” would be quite apropos.
Update: Thanks for the reminder. Birthday wishes also go out to Justice Kennedy’s most famous former clerk: Judge Alex Kozinski!
Justice Kennedy Turns 71 [How Appealing]
* We include Mr. Cohen’s name with his permission (and wish him good luck on the bar exam tomorrow). But our default rule at ATL is anonymity for all correspondents.

supreme court 2.JPGDavid Souter is signing Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s yearbook. Sam Alito is hoping he’ll get a better locker next year. Nino Scalia is mapping out which European restaurants he’s going to hit this summer. Yes, that’s right: today is the last scheduled day of the Supreme Court’s Term.
The justices are handing down opinions as we type. We’ll have coverage and links pertaining to today’s decisions in a subsequent post.
Will there be any surprises? Or will the paramount importance of Justice Kennedy simply be further confirmed — as if this fact, noted by the astute Jim Ho, wasn’t revealing enough?
Check back soon for more.
Update / correction: Today was, according to the Court’s OT 2006 calendar (PDF), the last scheduled non-argument session. But because the justices didn’t hand down all of the Term’s opinions today, they will issue more decisions on Thursday.
Batting 1.000 [Volokh Conspiracy]

gun pistol firearm Second Amendment Above the Law blog.jpgLiberal law professors can be pretty predictable in their tastes. Volvo stationwagons. Fair trade coffee. Guns.
Guns? Yes, guns. No, not gunners — guns. Firearms. Bang bang. The good ol’ Second Amendment.
According to a very interesting NYT article, by Adam Liptak:

In March, for the first time in the nation’s history, a federal appeals court struck down a gun control law on Second Amendment grounds. Only a few decades ago, the decision would have been unimaginable.

There used to be an almost complete scholarly and judicial consensus that the Second Amendment protects only a collective right of the states to maintain militias. That consensus no longer exists — thanks largely to the work over the last 20 years of several leading liberal law professors, who have come to embrace the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns.

In those two decades, breakneck speed by the standards of constitutional law, they have helped to reshape the debate over gun rights in the United States. Their work culminated in the March decision, Parker v. District of Columbia, and it will doubtless play a major role should the case reach the United States Supreme Court.

Legal academic debate with real-world ramifications? Wow. This truly is newsworthy.
Thoughtful blogospheric reactions from Jonathan Adler, Jack Balkin, Randy Barnett, and Michael Dorf, among others. We were most amused by Professor Dorf, who blog-slaps Liptak, before concluding his post in delightfully catty fashion:

Full disclosure: I spoke with Mr. Liptak last week and expressed skepticism (along the lines described above) about his causal claim. I guess I didn’t say anything quote-worthy.

HA. Hell hath no fury like a law professor not name-checked.
(Sorry, Professor Dorf — not everyone is as susceptible to your charms as Justice Kennedy. You may spend your entire life searching for a jurisprudential romance to match what you had with AMK at One First Street, back in the heady days of October Term 1991.)
A Liberal Case for the Individual Right to Own Guns Helps Sway the Federal Judiciary [New York Times]
Scholarship and the Second Amendment in the Courts [Dorf on Law]
How Liberals Saved the Second Amendment [Volokh Conspiracy]
Scholars and the Second Amendment [Volokh Conspiracy]
The Second Amendment is Embarrassing No More [Balkinization]

Morning Docket: 05.07.07

sphinx of sacramento Anthony Kennedy Justice Anthony M Kennedy Above the Law blog.JPG* Justice Kennedy profile: “The Sphinx of Sacramento.” [Slate]
* NBA refs give a new meaning to DWB. [
SI]
* Imus plans lawsuit based on contractual language that acknowledged irreverence. [MSNBC]
* Trans fat lawsuit against KFC deep fried, disposed of properly. [CNN]
* Indian judge who issued Gere warrant transferred. “Routine”? [MSNBC]

kennedy.jpgAnd now back to a more contentious subject: the death penalty. In three opinions issued today, the Supreme Court reversed the convictions of Texas death row inmates.
Each of the cases involved a problem with the lower appellate courts’ application of prior SCOTUS rulings on special jury instructions in death penalty cases. All three decisions were 5-4, with the usual suspects (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito) in dissent. Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in Smith v. Texas; Stevens wrote the other two, Abdul-Kamir v. Quarterman and Brewer v. Quarterman, which had been orally argued together.
From SCOTUSblog:

In one of two rulings Wednesday on death penalty procedures in Texas, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas’ highest state court wrongly put up a new legal barrier to a death row inmate’s challenge to jury instructions in his sentencing. The 5-4 decision came in the case of Smith v. Texas (05-11304), a case that had been before the Court once before.. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority.
The Court reversed the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ ruling that reinstated the death sentence of a Dallas man, LaRoyce Smith; the state court had applied a new harmless error standard under state law. That was a misinterpretation of what federal law required, the Court concluded.
In the consolidated cases of Abdul-Kabir v. Quarterman (05-11284) and Brewer v. Quarterman (05-11287), the Court in another 5-4 decision found that the Fifth Circuit Court wrongly applied prior rulings on instructions to assure that capital juries give full consideration to any factor that might suggest a death sentence should not be imposed.

I credit Kennedy not so much because he wrote one of the majority opinions, but because he was surely once again the swing vote in what is becoming a heavy trend of 5-4 opinions. So much for Roberts’ goal of a unified court.
How Appealing has links to the opinions here.

Pregnant Belly 2 Above the Law blog.JPGThis just in from One First Street. The Associated Press reports:

The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long- awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

The opponents of the act “have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

The decision pitted the court’s conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush’s two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

This ruling lends support to those who predict — like Jan Crawford Greenburg, in Supreme Conflict — that Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito will move the Court significantly to the right in the years ahead. Before Justice Alito replaced Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a decision like this one would have required the conservatives to secure TWO swing votes, AMK and SOC, instead of just one. That frequently doomed the conservatives to defeat in the big-ticket cases.
So Justice Alito, appointed to the Court by President Bush, probably made all the difference here. As Senatrix Barbara Boxer recently observed: “Elections have consequences.”
Update: For more detailed commentary, check out Lyle Denniston’s SCOTUSblog post, which quotes extensively from Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent. To read the opinion itself, click here (PDF).
Court Backs Ban on Abortion Procedure [Associated Press]
Court upholds federal abortion ban [SCOTUSblog]
Gonzales v. Carhart (PDF) [SCOTUSblog]
Senator Boxer: Elections Have Consequences [YouTube]

William Shakespeare Hamlet Above the Law legal tabloid.jpgSome of you have inquired into the rest of our coverage of last week’s Trial of Hamlet, presided over by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. Thanks for the reminder.
Well, here it is. It’s ridiculously late, and it’s probably of interest only to folks who also attended the event.
If you feel like it, you can check it out after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The Supreme Court Hears the Trial of Hamlet (Part 2)”

Gregory Kennedy Greg Kennedy Above the Law blog.jpgOOPS!!! Sorry about that.
The Court’s order vacating its December grant of review explains that it was “advised by Justice Kennedy that he now realizes that he should have recused himself from participation in this case, and does now recuse himself.”
Justice Kennedy contemplated, but ultimately decided against, issuing a separate order explaining his belated recusal, calling his son Gregory Kennedy (at right) “very handsome,” and declaring his intention “to hug him no matter how old he gets.”
Kennedy Recuses From Antitrust Case Involving Son’s Company [Legal Times]
Greg Kennedy bio [Credit Suisse]
Earlier: The Michigan Supreme Sandbox: We Left Out the Best Part

Anthony Kennedy Justice Anthony M Kennedy Above the Law blog.jpgWe thoroughly enjoyed ourselves at last night’s Kennedy Center event, The Trial of Hamlet, presided over by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. It was highly entertaining and quite educational, on a number of subjects: Hamlet, literary criticism, psychiatry, and the art of advocacy, among others.
We’re planning to write more about the evening later. For now, we’ll give you the bottom line: Who won?
The prosecution team consisted of Miles Ehrlich, a former federal prosecutor (and law clerk to Justice Kennedy), and Cristina Arguedas, a California criminal defense attorney. Hamlet was represented by Abbe Lowell, the prominent D.C. defense lawyer, and Catherine Crier, a Court TV host and former Texas state judge. The defense argued that Hamlet should not be held criminally responsible for the killing of Polonius by reason of insanity.
After testimony from psychiatric experts and arguments from counsel, the jury of 12 retired to deliberate. In the end, they emerged deadlocked, voting 6-6 in the case. After receiving the jury’s verdict, Justice Kennedy, without missing a beat, said something like, “Hamlet, please rise. I hereby remand you to the pages of literature, where you will continue to intrigue us for centuries to come….”
Justice Kennedy’s “remand” speech was so eloquent that it sounded scripted. Many audience members were left wondering whether the outcome was rigged — whether the jury was going to be a hung jury no matter what, in order to demonstrate the complexity, ambiguity, and richness of Hamlet as a literary text.
As it turns out, however, the jury vote was NOT rigged. They truly were deadlocked, by the end of their deliberation time (which, due to the schedule for the evening, was admittedly not that long).
And don’t blame Justice Kennedy for their indecision! While the jury was deliberating, AMK was moderating a discussion about the play with the participants in the trial, in front of the Kennedy Center audience.
Despite the frustratingly ambiguous verdict — we must admit, we like our entertainment with closure — we had a good time. More discussion will follow later. If you attended and have thoughts to share, please feel free to email us.
Sane or not, Hamlet a hit in Washington trial [Reuters]
Earlier: Justice Kennedy and The Trial of Hamlet

Anthony Kennedy Justice Anthony M Kennedy Above the Law blog.jpgJustice Anthony M. Kennedy has been described by many — e.g., Jeffrey Rosen — as a Hamlet-like justice, who agonizes over every decision. And later this week — perhaps this was his therapist’s idea? — Justice Kennedy will preside over the trial of his dramatic alter ego.
From the NYT:

[Hamlet's] criminal responsibility — whether he was sane at the time of [the] killing [of Polonius] — is the central question of “The Trial of Hamlet,” to be heard here on Thursday at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The mock trial is a Washington wonk’s dream, stacked with Shakespeare-loving luminaries. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court, an enthusiastic Shakespeare aficionado who conceived of the idea, will preside over the trial.

“What you realize is that you know Hamlet better than you know some real people, because he tells you exactly what he is thinking,” said Justice Kennedy in a telephone interview. “The trial provides a fascinating, oblique way in which to examine Hamlet, the legal process and the intellect of Shakespeare, who continues to speak to us in our own time.”

It should be a great event, especially if one goes by ticket sales. It sold out, got moved to a larger venue, and sold out again.
We’d love to attend; alas, it’s sold out. If you have an extra ticket that you’re looking to sell, please email us. Thanks!
Was Dane’s Madness Just Method? Jury to Decide [New York Times]
The Supreme Court Hears the Trial of Hamlet [Kennedy Center]

Morning Docket: 02.15.07

Anna Nicole Smith ANS pic Anna Nicole Smith photo Anna Nicole Smith photograph former topless dancer Supreme Court Above the Law Above the Law ANS.JPG* Lawyer was grand jury leak in BALCO case. [MSNBC]
* Justice Kennedy: Pay the judges! [Law.com]
* Notre Dame’s Coach Weis testifies in gastric bypass malpractice case. Tom Brady may testify. [
CBS Sportsline]
* Judge allows burial of Anna Nicole Smith. [MSNBC]
* Should you marry a lawyer? [WSJ Law Blog]