FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2214403741> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2214403741 abstract "Who should own a federal judge’s papers? This question has rarely been asked. Instead, it has generally been accepted that the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal judges own their own working papers, which include papers created by judges relating to their official duties, such as internal draft opinions, confidential vote sheets, and case-related correspondence. This longstanding tradition of private ownership has led to tremendous inconsistency. For example, Justice Thurgood Marshall’s papers were released just two years after he left the bench, revealing behind-the-scenes details about major cases involving issues like abortion and flag burning. In contrast, Justice David Souter’s papers will remain closed until the 50th anniversary of his retirement, and substantial portions of Justice Byron White’s papers, including files relating to the landmark case of Miranda v. Arizona, were shredded. In addition, many collections of lower federal court judges’ papers have been scattered in the hands of judges’ families. Notably, this private ownership model has persisted despite the fact that our country’s treatment of presidential records shifted from private to public ownership through the Presidential Records Act of 1978. Furthermore, private ownership of judicial papers has endured even though it has proven ill-equipped to balance the many competing interests at stake, ranging from calls for governmental accountability and transparency on the one hand to the judiciary’s independence, confidentiality and collegiality on the other.This Article is the first to give significant attention to the question of who should own federal judges’ working papers and what should happen to the papers once a judge leaves the bench. Upon the 35th anniversary of the enactment of the Presidential Records Act, this Article argues that judges’ working papers should be treated as governmental property — just as presidential papers are. Although there are important differences between the roles of President and judge, none of the differences suggest that judicial papers should be treated as a species of private property. Rather, the unique position of federal judges, including the judiciary’s independence, should be taken into account when crafting rules that speak to reasonable access to and disposition of judicial papers — not when answering the threshold question of ownership. Ultimately, this Article — giving renewed attention to a long forgotten 1977 governmental study commissioned by Congress — argues that Congress should declare judicial papers public property and should empower the judiciary to promulgate rules implementing the shift to public ownership. These would include, for example, rules governing the timing of public release of judicial papers. By involving the judiciary in implementing the shift to public ownership, Congress would enhance the likelihood of judicial cooperation, mitigate separation of powers concerns, and enable the judiciary to safeguard judicial independence, collegiality and confidentiality." @default.
• W2214403741 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2214403741 creator A5010929020 @default.
• W2214403741 date "2013-02-27" @default.
• W2214403741 modified "2023-09-22" @default.
• W2214403741 title "Judges and Their Papers" @default.
• W2214403741 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2214403741 type Work @default.
• W2214403741 sameAs 2214403741 @default.
• W2214403741 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2214403741 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W2214403741 hasAuthorship W2214403741A5010929020 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C197487636 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C2776007630 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C2780233690 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C71745522 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C139621336 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C17744445 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C197487636 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C199539241 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C2776007630 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C2778272461 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C2780233690 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C71745522 @default.
• W2214403741 hasConceptScore W2214403741C94625758 @default.
• W2214403741 hasLocation W22144037411 @default.
• W2214403741 hasOpenAccess W2214403741 @default.
• W2214403741 hasPrimaryLocation W22144037411 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W1532866945 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W156267250 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W17400435 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W2197994577 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W2291976508 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W2342480766 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W247970280 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W265697098 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W2697410657 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W2774340292 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W288849704 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W305512570 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W3121451309 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W3124121340 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W31496338 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W338120031 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W403755260 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W4830352 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W819900719 @default.
• W2214403741 hasRelatedWork W212136577 @default.
• W2214403741 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2214403741 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2214403741 magId "2214403741" @default.
• W2214403741 workType "article" @default.