Search

American law clerks often draft opinions for their judges. Yet American legal culture is remarkably diffident about that simple fact. The role that law clerks play in drafting opinions is not a secret. Far from it. But it might qualify to be somewhere in the outer vicinity of being an “open secret.” And it continues to be controversial., This essay explores a set of questions about opinion-writing by law clerks. The first major question is meta-normative. The goal is not to decide whether the practice of law clerks drafting opinions is proper or improper, but why it is occluded and controversial in the first place. Specifically, why is there so much more diffidence and doubt about the role of law clerks than about the work of aides in the other branches of government such as Presidential speechwriters and Congressional staff?, The second question is hermeneutic. Should the fact that judges might not always draft their own opinions lead us to read and interpret those opinions differently, especially when we draw conclusions about the “jurisprudence” of this or that judge or Justice or the way that legal doctrines often seem to be shaped by longstanding, dialectical, debates among judges or Justices?, The discussion of both questions tries to shed some light on broader constitutional and jurisprudential questions, including the distinctly metonymic relationship between the “President” and the rest of the Executive Branch and the complicated connections between judicial reasoning, the exercise of judicial authority, and the identity of the individual judge., This essay was written as part of symposium marking the hundredth anniversary of the formal institution of Supreme Court law clerks.

"En este artículo estudio la controversia en torno a la publicación del libro escrito por fray Maturino Gilberti, Diálogo de doctrina cristiana en lengua de Mechuacán, iniciada por el primer obispo de Michoacán don Vasco de Quiroga, pero resuelta muchos años después de su muerte. Un conflicto de índole judicial que nos permitirá comprender el decisivo papel que desempeñaron los tribunales eclesiásticos, dentro y fuera de la Nueva España, para dirimir los dilemas pastorales que implicaba la traducción de textos sagrados y doctrinales en las lenguas de los indios." "This article analyzes the controversy over the publication of Friar Maturino Gilberti’s book Diálogo de doctrina cristiana en lengua Mechuacán, a dispute sparked by Michoacán’s first bishop, Don Vasco de Quiroga, which could not be settled until long after his death. This legal conflict will allow us to understand the decisive role played by ecclesiastic courts, both in and out of New Spain, to resolve the dilemmas faced by pastors when translating sacred and doctrinal texts into the indigenous languages."

El libro analiza la organización, el funcionamiento y la razón de ser de los foros eclesiásticos de justicia novohispanos. El trabajo va más allá del simple estudio institucional, ya que Jorge Traslosheros se adentra, gracias al uso de un sustancioso aparato crítico, en la historia misma del concepto de justicia. En efecto, identifica tanto los vínculos que unieron la Teología moral, el Derecho canónico y los foros eclesiásticos de justicia, como la naturaleza de las relaciones que existieron...

International audience; Our contribution is about the judicial interpretation of a serious revolution exploded in Candia in 1363. In the august of the same year, many Venetian patricians and colonists deposed the Duke of Crete in charge and proclaimed independence from Venice. The homeland - shocked by the attack at the heart of its power - tried to come to terms with the rebels, but once Venice became aware of their will in persisting to be mutinous, decided to counter attack, accused the rebels to attempt to its majesty, proclaimed the insurgents heretics and fought against them. The judicial language used by Venetian authorities is centered around some categories and cases in point which referred to a specific kind of crime in late Medieval Europe : the crimen lese maiestatis. The most interesting fact, that we output in our contribution, is that these categories substituted the expression crimen lese maietstais. In particular, the terms proditio and rebellio, were used by Venetians in order to connote the crime committed : the refuse of the obedience to the political authority. During our contribution, the Cretan revolt has been compared to two others serious rebellions which upset the political life in Venice : the conspiracy of Baiamonte Tiepolo and Marco Querini and the coup d’état planned by the doge Marino Falier. In this way the law system and justice were used by Venice as flexible elements to create consent and to legitimate its power; Il contributo esamina la repressione della rivolta nota alla storiografia come rivolta di San Tito (1363-1366). Si tratta di un’insurrezione molto seria che vide i coloni veneziani residenti sull’isola ribellarsi all’auctoritas veneziana. Il nostro studio – incentrato sugli aspetti giudiziari della repressione –, esamina la rivolta nei termini di delitto di lesa maestà. Nonostante non sia mai apertamente invocato, l’intera risposta giudiziaria elaborata da Venezia nei confronti dei ribelli di Creta venne formalizzata attraverso fattispecie giuridiche (proditio e rebellio) riconducibili direttamente al concetto di crimen lese maiestatis, principio cardine del binomio repressione/gestione del dissenso politico alla fine del Medioevo. Il nostro obiettivo é quello di provare a spiegare come e perché la repressione della rivolta di San Tito possa ascriversi a tale concetto, confrontandola con altri due gravi episodi di rivolta che agitarono la società veneziana nella seconda metà del Trecento ; vale a dire la cospirazione ordita da Baiamonte Tiepolo e Marco Querini e il colpo di stato del doge Marino Falier. Nel corso della trattazione vengono messi in luce tutti quegli elementi che, a livello giuridico e giudiziario, furono impiegati dalla Repubblica di Venezia al fine di creare consenso politico e legittimare il proprio potere sull’isola

El artículo rastrea el rol político de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Colombia en el gobierno del general Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, en particular entre 1953 y 1956. Para esto, aborda las relaciones entre el gobierno del general Rojas y la Corte Suprema durante el período mencionado, y los modos como en distintos momentos el régimen militar trató de afectar la independencia del tribunal. El control constitucional de los decretos y reformas constitucionales durante el gobierno de Rojas deja ver los comportamientos estratégicos del tribunal, y las interdependencias entre el derecho y la política. The paper explores the political role of the Supreme Court of Colombia during the government of General Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, particularly from 1953 to 1956. It deals with the relationship between the government of General Rojas and the Supreme Court during the abovementioned period, and the ways in which the military regime tried to affect the independence of the court at different times. The constitutional judicial review of decrees and constitutional reforms during the Rojas administration reveals the strategic behavior of the court, and the interdependencies between law and politics. Este artigo indaga o papel político da Suprema Corte de Justiça da Colômbia no governo do general Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, em particular entre 1953 e 1956. Para isso, aborda as relações entre o governo do general Rojas e a Suprema Corte durante o período mencionado, e os modos como os diferentes momentos o regime militar tentou afetar a independência do tribunal. O controle constitucional dos decretos e reformas constitucionais durante o governo de Rojas permite ver os comportamentos estratégicos do tribunal, e as interdependências entre o direito e a política.

International audience; Founded in Chambéry at the end of the long French occupation of the Duchy of Savoy (1536-1559) on the stock of a parliament established on the Capetian model and itself rooted in the venerable precedent of a Resident Council dating from the 13th century century, the Senate of Savoy represents the eldest of the four other sovereign courts of justice of Turin, Nice, Casal and Genova established in its wake by the House of Savoy in the continental possessions of its States. Prestigious political institutions from the end of the 16th to the middle of the 19th century, Reale Udienza of Cagliari excepted, these Senates indeed govern the Sabaudo-Sardinian judicial order in their respective provinces until the date of their disqualification as a simple court of appeal, in 1847, on the eve of the promulgation of the Statuto costituzionale Albertin.However, at a time when the future of the Court of Appeal of Chambéry, a historic vestige of the late Senate of Savoy having survived the Annexation of 1860, is once again proving uncertain at the start of the 21st century, it It is important to remember how much the institution, including in its current watered-down form, nevertheless represents an essential element of Savoyard heritage. Because for four centuries it played in the territorial cradle of the eponymous dynasty a leading political role on the sidelines of its traditional jurisdictional attributions. He certainly represented there a leading organ for the relay of a princely will henceforth installed beyond the mountains. But perhaps even more clearly, he stubbornly defended local specificities with the Chancellery and the government of Turin within a heterogeneous political whole where the opposition between Savoyards and Piedmontese, in the context of an imperial institutional tradition well-known, completely foreign to the exacerbation of any form of unitary national feeling, has long constituted a kind of tradition.As in Nice, moreover, the old sovereign court also played throughout Modern Times an essential role of social advancement for the native families of notables whose offspring managed to integrate the prestigious company. And this at least until the time of the authoritarian officialization of the judiciary and the bringing to heel of the personnel of the high magistracy, from the end of the reign of Victor-Amédée II, during the first decades of the Age of Enlightenment. It can thus boast of having hosted some of the most famous figures in Savoyard history, from Antoine Favre to Joseph de Maistre for example.Finally, nowadays, at the heart of a vanished political complex of which Turin may have represented the epicenter, that of those States of Savoy so difficult to hear for the layman on either side of the Franco-Italian border of the nations, the setting parallel to the singular destiny of the late Nice Senate with that of its Chambéry model, on the occasion of the 400th anniversary of its creation, fortunately participates in the evocation of a singular political history... as little known in the Alpes Maritimes as in the northern alpine departments of Savoie and Haute-Savoie by the population of their many new residents, unfortunately too often misled by the only misleading clichés of the Côte d'Azur and the eternal whiteness of His Majesty Mont Blanc.; Fondé à Chambéry à l’issue de la longue occupation française du duché de Savoie (1536-1559) sur la souche d’un parlement établi sur le modèle capétien et lui-même enraciné sur le vénérable précédent d’un Conseil résident daté du XIIIe siècle, le Sénat de Savoie représente l’aînée des quatre autres cours souveraines de justice de Turin, de Nice, de Casal et de Gènes établies à sa suite par la Maison de Savoie dans les possessions continentales de ses Etats. Institutions politiques prestigieuses de la fin du XVIe au milieu du XIXe siècle, Reale Udienza de Cagliari exceptée, ces Sénats régissent en effet l’ordre judiciaire sabaudo-sarde dans leurs provinces respectives jusqu’à la date de leur disqualification en simple cours d’appel, en 1847, à la veille de la promulgation du Statuto costituzionale albertin.Or à l’heure où l’avenir de la Cour d’appel de Chambéry, vestige historique de feu le Sénat de Savoie ayant survécu à l’Annexion de 1860, s’avère à nouveau incertain en ce début de XXIe siècle, il s’avère important de rappeler combien l’institution, y compris sous sa forme édulcorée actuelle, représente néanmoins un élément incontournable du patrimoine savoyard. Car quatre siècles durant il a joué dans le berceau territorial de la dynastie éponyme un rôle politique de premier plan en marge de ses attributions juridictionnelles classiques. Il y a certes représenté un organe de premier plan pour le relais d’une volonté princière dorénavant installée outre-monts. Mais peut-être plus nettement encore, il a obstinément défendu les spécificités locales auprès de la Chancellerie et du gouvernement de Turin au sein d’un ensemble politique hétérogène où l’opposition entre Savoyards et Piémontais, dans le contexte d’une tradition institutionnelle impériale notoire, parfaitement étrangère l’exacerbation de toute forme de sentiment national unitaire, a longtemps constitué une espèce de tradition.De même qu’à Nice au demeurant, la vieille cour souveraine a également joué tout au long des Temps Modernes un rôle incontournable de promotion sociale pour les familles autochtones de notables dont les rejetons parvinrent à intégrer la prestigieuse compagnie. Et ce au moins jusqu’à l’époque de la fonctionnarisation autoritaire de l’appareil judiciaire et de la mise au pas du personnel de la haute magistrature, à compter de la fin du règne de Victor-Amédée II, lors des premières décennies du Siècle des Lumières. Elle peut ainsi se targuer d’avoir accueilli en son sein quelques-unes des figures les plus célèbres de l’histoire savoyarde, d’Antoine Favre à Joseph de Maistre par exemple.De nos jours enfin, au cœur d’un complexe politique évanoui dont Turin a pu représenter l’épicentre, celui de ces Etats de Savoie si difficiles à entendre pour le profane de part et autre de la frontière franco-italienne des nations, la mise en parallèle du destin singulier du regretté Sénat niçois avec celui de son modèle chambérien, à l’occasion du 400e anniversaire de sa création, participe heureusement à l’évocation d’une histoire politique singulière… aussi mal connue dans les Alpes Maritimes que dans les départements alpins septentrionaux de Savoie et de Haute-Savoie par la population de leurs nombreux nouveaux résidents, malheureusement trop souvent abusés par les seuls poncifs trompeurs de la Côte d’azur et des blancheurs éternelles de sa Majesté le Mont Blanc.; Fondata a Chambéry al termine della lunga occupazione francese del Ducato di Savoia (1536-1559) su ceppo di un parlamento stabilito sul modello capetingio e radicata essa stessa nel venerabile precedente di un Consiglio residente del XIII secolo, il Senato di Savoia rappresenta la maggiore delle altre quattro corti sovrane di giustizia di Torino, Nizza, Casal e Genova istituite sulla sua scia da Casa Savoia nei possedimenti continentali dei suoi Stati. Prestigiose istituzioni politiche dalla fine del 16° alla metà del 19° secolo, esclusa la Reale Udienza di Cagliari, questi Senatori infatti governano l'ordinamento giudiziario sabaudo-sardo nelle rispettive province fino alla data della loro squalifica come semplice corte d'appello, nel 1847, alla vigilia della promulgazione dello Statuto costituzionale Albertino.Tuttavia, in un momento in cui il futuro della Corte d'Appello di Chambéry, vestigia storica del defunto Senato di Savoia sopravvissuto all'annessione del 1860, si rivela ancora una volta incerto all'inizio del XXI secolo, è importante ricordiamo quanto l'istituzione, anche nella sua attuale forma annacquata, rappresenti comunque un elemento essenziale del patrimonio sabaudo. Perché per quattro secoli ha svolto nella culla territoriale dell'omonima dinastia un ruolo politico di primo piano a margine delle sue tradizionali attribuzioni giurisdizionali. Vi rappresentò certamente un organo principale per la trasmissione di un testamento principesco d'ora in poi installato oltre le monti. Ma forse ancora più chiaramente difese caparbiamente le specificità locali con la Cancelleria e il governo di Torino all'interno di un insieme politico eterogeneo dove l'opposizione tra Savoiardi e Piemontesi, nell'ambito di una tradizione istituzionale imperiale ben nota, del tutto estranea all'esacerbazione di ogni forma di sentimento nazionale unitario, ha costituito a lungo una specie di tradizione.Come a Nizza, d'altronde, anche l'antica corte sovrana svolse in tutta l'epoca moderna un ruolo essenziale di promozione sociale per le famiglie autoctone di notabili i cui discendenti riuscirono a integrare la prestigiosa compagnia. E questo almeno fino all'epoca dell'ufficialità autoritaria della magistratura e della messa in discussione del personale dell'alta magistratura, dalla fine del regno di Victor-Amédée II, durante i primi decenni dell'Illuminismo. Può così vantarsi di aver ospitato alcuni dei personaggi più famosi della storia sabauda, ​​da Antoine Favre a Joseph de Maistre per esempio.Infine, oggigiorno, nel cuore di un complesso politico scomparso di cui Torino potrebbe aver rappresentato l'epicentro, quello di quegli Stati sabaudi così difficili da comprendere per il laico ai lati del confine franco-italiano delle nazioni, il parallelo il singolare destino del defunto Senato di Nizza con quello del suo modello Chambéry, in occasione del 400° anniversario della sua creazione, partecipa fortunatamente all'evocazione di una singolare storia politica... tanto poco conosciuta nelle Alpi Marittime quanto nel nord dipartimenti alpini della Savoia e dell'Alta Savoia dalla popolazione dei suoi numerosi nuovi residenti, purtroppo troppo spesso fuorviata dagli unici luoghi comuni fuorvianti della Costa Azzurra e dall'eterno candore di Sua Maestà il Monte Bianco.

El artículo rastrea el rol político de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Colombia en el gobierno del general Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, en particular entre 1953 y 1956. Para esto, aborda las relaciones entre el gobierno del general Rojas y la Corte Suprema durante el período mencionado, y los modos como en distintos momentos el régimen militar trató de afectar la independencia del tribunal. El control constitucional de los decretos y reformas constitucionales durante el gobierno de Rojas deja ver los comportamientos estratégicos del tribunal, y las interdependencias entre el derecho y la política. The paper explores the political role of the Supreme Court of Colombia during the government of General Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, particularly from 1953 to 1956. It deals with the relationship between the government of General Rojas and the Supreme Court during the abovementioned period, and the ways in which the military regime tried to affect the independence of the court at different times. The constitutional judicial review of decrees and constitutional reforms during the Rojas administration reveals the strategic behavior of the court, and the interdependencies between law and politics. Este artigo indaga o papel político da Suprema Corte de Justiça da Colômbia no governo do general Gustavo Rojas Pinilla, em particular entre 1953 e 1956. Para isso, aborda as relações entre o governo do general Rojas e a Suprema Corte durante o período mencionado, e os modos como os diferentes momentos o regime militar tentou afetar a independência do tribunal. O controle constitucional dos decretos e reformas constitucionais durante o governo de Rojas permite ver os comportamentos estratégicos do tribunal, e as interdependências entre o direito e a política.

Se establecen tres perfiles de delincuentes adolescentes en función de la relación del sentimiento de ira con la psicopatología y el abuso de sustancias. Three teenager offenders profiles are established according to the relationship between feelings of anger, psychopathology and substance abuse.