User talk:NoSeptember/archives/legal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
   Return to the NoSeptember:  
Topical archives index   Talk page   

Succession by seat[edit]

Related talk: here

List of U.S. Supreme Court Justices[edit]

Related talk: here

Judiciary Act[edit]

Related talk: here

Political composition of courts[edit]

On my talk page you wrote:

I am putting together something on the "political composition" of circuit courts since there seems to be some interest in that. User:NoSeptember/Federal judge appointment history Before I get too far, I would appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have. NoSeptember (talk) 14:05, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My comments: I like the concept, but I worry that our circuit court pages are too cluttered, especially since we started putting in the succession histories. Further, the number of justices appointed by each president, while necessary for a complete historical record, is frankly not that relevant to the history of the court and the current political and legal composition of the court. For instance, you'd be hard pressed to guess, if you didn't know already, that John Paul Stevens was a Ford appointee. There have been some good attempts at consolidating the succession charts into a 2-dimensional diagram that could let the reader see how the court was aligned in any given year. But this would be a mammoth use of space, especially for the 9th Circuit and other big courts, and I'm not sure how we could pull such a thing off without losing the reader entirely. If there is such a solution, your data points would fit in nicely. I don't see a place for it in the current scheme, however. --Saucy Intruder 19:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re Federal judicial appointment history: Here's what I would suggest. Consolidate the "appointed by each president" chart with the "appointed by Democrats/Republicans" chart, in order to save space. Remove the chart with percentages, as it is redundant (discrete values that are this low can be adequately illustrated without using percentages). Include the Supreme Court chart on the Supreme Court of the United States page (consolidated as above). Include the "United States Court of Appeals Summary" charts (consolidated, as above) on the United States Courts of Appeals page. I don't think it's necessary or informative to have charts for the individual circuits, unless there is a discussion of political biases or controversies within a particular circuit court (i.e. 4th or 9th). The political makeup of each court can be easily deduced from the chart containing the current and former judges on a particular court. --Saucy Intruder 20:05, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here and here

R.e.: Constitution in exile[edit]

Thanks for the heads-up. I hadn't seen this article; I don't think that it needs to be merged, as I think it bears having its own page. However, it could probably do with some polish and some back-and-forth linkage to related topics (e.g. Originalism, The Living Constitution, Randy Barnett, Cass Sunstein, etc.Simon Dodd 18:49, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Circuit template[edit]

Related talk: here / the template

List of OT 2004 Supreme Court decisions[edit]

See User:Saucy_Intruder/sandbox. The list of decisions would be organized by broad subject matter and contain vital statistics and outside links. Any suggestions for improving the look and feel of this template? Would you be willing to help out with a portion? --Saucy Intruder 5 July 2005 00:39 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Opinions of Justice Scalia[edit]

Thanks for the heads up, I have posted some notes in reply. I also think the suggestions of similar categories for Justices like Marshall, Holmes and Black are entirely appropriate, and good ideas. Simon Dodd 9 July 2005 18:00 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Ed Prado[edit]

Would you object if I moved this to Edward C. Prado? Even though he goes by Ed, to me it sounds a bit informal for an article on a federal judge. -- BD2412 talk 00:18, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I'll take care of it as soon as the redirect I made there gets deleted. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 00:30, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Circuit court bios[edit]

Your circuit court bio project sounds like something Postdlf would be interested in. I imagine I will, inevitably, end up doing more as well. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 03:14, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

This is a tough project, since most circuit court judges happily toil in obscurity and don't lead very interesting lives outside of their chambers. As far as rote biographical information goes, is the most comprehensive source. We should probably prioritize - start with those on the SCOTUS short list, and then add the "superstars" like Posner, Easterbrook, Calabresi, Kozinski, etc. On a side note, I am happy to see that we have a small but dedicated group of people hard at work at improving the breadth and quality of law articles on Wikipedia. My own participation has been lax due to the demands of summer associate life, but next on my to-do list is to template and standardize the articles in List of United States federal legislation. --Saucy Intruder 04:24, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here, here, here and here

Maura Corrigan[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Maura Corrigan, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from web sites. For more information, take a look at our policy library. Happy editing!


I just wanted to commend you for starting the article on Roberts early. I love it when Wikipedia gets to things before the press/public picks up on them. (e.g. the Laotian rock rat). Keep up the prescient work. Dave (talk) 06:02, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Bush v Gore[edit]

I accept your revert - I can see what you mean - but I think that the way the argument on the page is put, it is POV in favour of Bush. It is reasonably clear reading the opinions that only the five majority justices actually agreed with the Equal Protection claim; the other two probably voted that way assuming that it was the easiest way to ensure the real winner could be determined. As it turned out, of course, the opposite result (ie no recounts, so no certainty of the winner) occurred. Anyway, the EP claim is fately flawed, as Dershowitz so well demonstrates in "Supreme Injustice" (which I recommend you and everyone else reads). Anyway happy editting! Batmanand 08:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

The battle for confirmation to the Supreme Court[edit]

Related talk: here and here

List of court decisions[edit]

Yes indeed, state court decisions are next... not sure how to organize it tho. There are many more states than circuits, and, conversely, some state supreme courts have never come down with the sort of landmark decision that would be notable in an encyclopedia (I'm betting it's mostly New York, California, and Florida). -- BD2412 talk 16:21, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

  • True - esp. about Deleware for corporate. Best way to find the ones in here is probably to see what links to the courts - but not all state supreme courts have articles yet! -- BD2412 talk 16:36, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here


I apologize for the error in thinking Roberts would replace Breyer as the junior member on the Supreme Court. I noticed you said, "must be nice", so I thought maybe I had irritated you. I hope that wasn't the case. I think the work you do here is great. I normally do try to live up to a somewhat decent standard in editing or writing Wikipedia entries; obviously that goof did not live up to the standard. --JamesB3 11:20, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Taney error[edit]

Arrgghhh! How embarrassing for me! Thank you for correcting my error on Taney. A first-grade level math error! I shall crawl back into my cave now.Unschool 23:09, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Stephen Breyer[edit]

How funny is that - we just had an edit conflict fixing the "junior member" error on Stephen Breyer! -- BD2412 talk 11:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I saw that. We seem to follow each other around sometimes :-) , and aren't you supposed to be on wikibreak now? NoSeptember 12:05, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Missing Picture[edit]

Recently, I was reviewing the article on Janice Rogers Brown and notices that the picture that had been there is gone. I do not have enough "Wikipedia" expertise to put it back in place. Can you help? BoBo 20:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

List of United States Supreme Court cases[edit]

Whew! Well, this list and the sublists should be all done "purtied up" now - thanks for the tip on appointment vs. elevation vs. beginning of active duty! BD2412 T 16:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Fred M. Vinson[edit]

Related talk: here

Age of the Justices[edit]

Greetings, old friend. I've started a section on age in Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States, and I figured this would be in your realm of expertise - who was the youngest Justice appointed? Who was the oldest at the time of appointment? Who was the oldest still in service? How has the average age of the Court progressed over the centuries? Just some holes that I'd appreciate your help in filling. Cheers! BD2412 T 00:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I will work in some new information and trivia in the next few days. NoSeptember talk 04:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Here's a diversion...[edit]

I've planted a seed at Supreme Court of the United States in fiction. Cheers! BD2412 T 06:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture Question[edit]

No September, When I checked the Bush Supreme Court candidates site, I discovered that the pictures would not show up. In each picture box is a note that says there is an error where thumbnails can't be converted. Can you help me find out what has gone wrong? Thanks, BoBo 22:04, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The problem looks fixed now. Thanks, BoBo 03:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Federal Judicial Appointments[edit]

Appreciate the support. Love the pages, they're very valuable as a resource. I also expect plenty of activity in the upcoming months.--Smashingworth 03:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Clarence Thomas Article[edit]

The Clarence Thomas article is currently being discussed here regarding the insertion of some (potentially politically motivated) trivia. If you care to, could you take a look and comment? --Paul 01:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Related talk: here and here

I try to keep my promises... (Supreme Court opinions of...)[edit]

It may have taken me a year, but I finally got around to constructing lists organizing opinions by Supreme Court justice. I have finished three terms for Scalia so far: 2003; 2004; and 2005; the lists I've finished for the other justices can be seen here. Postdlf 21:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Related talk: here

Federal Judges[edit]

Thanks for your note on my page. I know the FJC site and use it to create new stubs/short articles on historic judges of the past, augmenting them with knowledge obtained from my career as a lawyer and/or my avocation as a legal historian, when applicable. My goal is to have at least a stub for each current and former federal judge, particularly the appellate judges, just as there is now for each former Supreme Court Justice. For the court pages, one question is whether to stick with the simple lists of present and former judges (example at United States District Court for the Southern District of New York) or to go with the more complex table format (example at United States District Court for the District of Maine), although creating the latter may be beyond my newbie technical capabilities at this point anyway. In any event, thanks for noticing my work; I appreciate the feedback. Newyorkbrad 19:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Related talk: here