{"id":54746,"date":"2016-09-30T11:27:00","date_gmt":"2016-09-30T16:27:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-legal\/supreme\/legal-commentary\/writ_index.html"},"modified":"2016-09-30T11:27:00","modified_gmt":"2016-09-30T16:27:00","slug":"writ_index","status":"publish","type":"supreme","link":"https:\/\/supreme.findlaw.com\/legal-commentary\/writ_index.html","title":{"rendered":"writ_index"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \n
\n \t\n\n\t\n\n\t\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n
<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n
JOHN W. DEAN<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
If Past Is Prologue, George Bush Is Becoming An Increasingly Dangerous President <\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\nFindLaw columnist and former counsel to the president John Dean evaluates President Bush’s current performance against political scientist Dr. James Dave Barber’s catalog of Presidents’ personality types. Dean argues that Bush has proven to be an active\/negative president, finding his job emotionally taxing but aggressive in his approach to it — and thus is in the company of Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. Dean assesses the implications of this categorization, and also predicts what Bush’s “October Surprise” this year may be. \n<\/span><\/td><\/tr>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n <\/table>
<\/td><\/tr>
\u00a0Columns<\/span><\/td>Archive<\/a>\u00a0<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td><\/tr><\/table>
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
JOHN W. DEAN<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
If Past Is Prologue, George Bush Is Becoming An Increasingly Dangerous President <\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\nFindLaw columnist and former counsel to the president John Dean evaluates President Bush’s current performance against political scientist Dr. James Dave Barber’s catalog of Presidents’ personality types. Dean argues that Bush has proven to be an active\/negative president, finding his job emotionally taxing but aggressive in his approach to it — and thus is in the company of Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. Dean assesses the implications of this categorization, and also predicts what Bush’s “October Surprise” this year may be. <\/span>
\nFriday, Apr. 21, 2006<\/span>
\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n
MARCI HAMILTON<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Twenty-first Century Religion and the Backlash Against Women’s Autonomy: Three Recent Events that Show that Women’s Freedom Is Imperiled <\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\nFindLaw columnist and Cardozo law professor Marci Hamilton cites three recent events in the news as evidence of threats to women’s autonomy both at home and abroad. Hamilton argues that ’50s-era concepts of women as “treasures” to be cherished, and possessions to be protected, but not persons entitled to freedom, are making new headway — and that women should vigilantly protect their autonomy, particularly at a time when it’s become plausible that Roe v. Wade might be overruled. <\/span>
\nThursday, Apr. 20, 2006<\/span>
\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
SHERRY F. COLB<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
Paternity Fraud: When Men Are Forced To Support Their Ex-Wives’ “Illegitimate” Children <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw columnist and Rutgers law professor Sherry Colb discusses how the law treats — and ought to treat “paternity fraud” — which occurs when a woman claims her husband is the biological father of her baby, but the biological father is actually a man with whom she was having an extramarital affair. Colb acknowledges the argument that it is not fair for a husband to pay for the product of his wife’s infidelity, but also notes that the presence of a third party — a child who may lose the only father he or she has ever known — is a very important factor here. <\/span>
\n\nTuesday, Apr. 18, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
ANITA RAMASASTRY<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
Can States Legally Put Residents’ Social Security Numbers and Other Identifying Data Online? The Troubling Answer Is That They Can, and Do <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw columnist and U. Washington law professor Anita Ramasastry discusses how states have often failed to update their public-records laws to account for the realities of the Internet age. Ramasastry argues that, given the ability of identity thieves and others to quickly search online public-records databases, states and their court systems should adopt laws and policies that mean that sensitive personal data is redacted from documents before they appear online. She also discusses several state cases in which plaintiffs have taken the stance that their private information ought to stay private. <\/span>
\n\nMonday, Apr. 17, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
EDWARD LAZARUS<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
Should Graphic Testimony About 9\/11 Have Been Heard By the Moussaoui Sentencing Jurors?The Continuing Controversy over the Use of Victim Impact Evidence <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Edward Lazarus looks at the use of graphic testimony about 9\/11 by prosecutors arguing that Zacarias Moussaoui should be sentenced to death. Lazarus explains how and why the Supreme Court flip-flopped on the admissibility of “victim impact evidence” such as this — ultimately deeming such evidence admissible. He also discusses the effect the particular 9\/11 evidence that has been introduced may be having in the Moussaoui case. <\/span>
\n\nFriday, Apr. 14, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
JONNA SPILBOR<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
The Rape That Never Was: Why, In Light Of The Lack Of DNA Evidence, The Case Against Duke’s Lacrosse Team Should Be Dropped <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw guest columnist, defense attorney, and television legal commentator Jonna Spilbor discusses the allegations of a rape by three Duke lacrosse players, in the light of the revelation that DNA evidence fails to link any of the players to the alleged victim. Spilbor argues that in light of this revelation, which strongly argues for the suspects’ innocence, the prosecutor ought to drop the case: While it is certainly true that rape cases may be prosecuted without DNA evidence, she notes, there are a number of aspects of this case that differentiate it from the kind of case where prosecution without DNA can be successful. <\/span>
\n\nFriday, Apr. 14, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
VIKRAM DAVID AMAR<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
Why the “Political Question Doctrine” Shouldn’t Necessarily Prevent Courts From Asking Whether a Spending Bill Actually Passed Congress
Part Two in a Series<\/span><\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw columnist and U.C. Hastings law professor Vikram Amar continues his series on the legal challenge to the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 — which reportedly failed to pass both houses of Congress, yet was signed by the President and is being treated as law nonetheless. Given what is apparently a blatant violation of the Constitution’s bicameralism requirement, can a federal court direct a remedy? As Amar explains, that depends on whether the case raises a nonjusticiable “political question” — and that, in turn, depends on two Supreme Court precedents that are in sharp tension with each other. <\/span>
\n\nThursday, Apr. 13, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
MICHAEL C. DORF<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
The Supreme Court Denies Review in the Case of “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla, But an Unusual Troika of Justices, Including the Chief, Issues a Warning to the Government <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw columnist and Columbia professor Michael Dorf analyzes the opinions accompanying the Supreme Court’s decision to deny review in the case of Jose Padilla, which raises the question of whether an American citizen apprehended in the U.S. can be deemed by the executive an enemy combatant subject to trial by military tribunal. Dorf argues that the most notable feature of these opinions is Chief Justice Roberts’ decision to join one of them — a decision that may (or may not) indicate Roberts will be less pro-Executive-Branch than one might have predicted. <\/span>
\n\nWednesday, Apr. 12, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
JULIE HILDEN<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
Can a Prison Constitutionally Deprive Ill-behaved Prisoners of Access to Newspapers, Magazines, and Photographs? The Supreme Court Will Soon Decide <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nFindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a case that will soon be decided by the Supreme Court, regarding the First Amendment rights of prisoners. The case, she notes, is especially interesting since one of the Third Circuit judges who heard it is now-Justice Samuel Alito — who dissented from the panel majority’s holding, and would have held against the prisoners. Hilden argues that, though Alito’s analysis is more persuasive than the panel’s in several respects, he was wrong about the outcome: The prisoners should have prevailed. <\/span>
\n\nTuesday, Apr. 11, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
BOB BARR<\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n
Tom DeLay: Why The Current Scandal Should Not Overshadow His Admirable Record <\/a><\/td>\n\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/table>\n\nWith conventional wisdom now excoriating Tom DeLay, former Congressman and FindLaw guest columnist Bob Barr reminds readers of DeLay’s achievements — citing specific examples from his own experience with DeLay, who served as Majority Whip during Barr’s tenure. Whatever DeLay may or may not have done now, Barr argues, his past record, and the attributes of his character that it revealed, are worth praise.<\/span>
\n\nTuesday, Apr. 11, 2006<\/span>
\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n