From 1802–38, Congress forced a specific Justice to return to D.C. each August to resolve outstanding procedural matters—an obscure precedent that underscores Congress's powers over the Court's docket
Your article reminded me of how Robert Caro outlined the legal strategy employed by Abe Fortas during Lyndon Johnson’s 1948 Senate campaign. As far as the Court’s role came into play, Fortas knew that Texas fell under the Fifth Circuit’s jurisdiction, and that Justice Hugo Black had oversight of its cases. Once the issue of an election, a state affair, and one already certified (a-hem) by the Texas Democratic party (by one vote), came before Justice Black, Mr. Fortas gambled that he would stop the lower district court’s permission to allow, in practical terms, the examination of voting roles in Alice.
If any of these machinations seem to have national parallels some 52 years later, I would not deny that such thoughts have crossed my mind as well.
I appreciate how “One First” distills Supreme Court developments into updates, and the breakdown of the Glacier Northwest decision—especially the nuance that the Court refused to preempt state tort claims arising from strike‑related property damage—clarifies a labor issue. The analysis reminds me of how a regional forum like the https://multnomahcountycourts.org often serves as the first arena for testing state‑level tort theories before they ascend to higher courts. Your concise trivia sections make the Court’s inner workings feel far more approachable for practitioners and lay readers alike.
Your article reminded me of how Robert Caro outlined the legal strategy employed by Abe Fortas during Lyndon Johnson’s 1948 Senate campaign. As far as the Court’s role came into play, Fortas knew that Texas fell under the Fifth Circuit’s jurisdiction, and that Justice Hugo Black had oversight of its cases. Once the issue of an election, a state affair, and one already certified (a-hem) by the Texas Democratic party (by one vote), came before Justice Black, Mr. Fortas gambled that he would stop the lower district court’s permission to allow, in practical terms, the examination of voting roles in Alice.
If any of these machinations seem to have national parallels some 52 years later, I would not deny that such thoughts have crossed my mind as well.
Indeed, that's the very historical vignette with which I open Chapter 6 of the book.
I appreciate how “One First” distills Supreme Court developments into updates, and the breakdown of the Glacier Northwest decision—especially the nuance that the Court refused to preempt state tort claims arising from strike‑related property damage—clarifies a labor issue. The analysis reminds me of how a regional forum like the https://multnomahcountycourts.org often serves as the first arena for testing state‑level tort theories before they ascend to higher courts. Your concise trivia sections make the Court’s inner workings feel far more approachable for practitioners and lay readers alike.