Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLoewenstem, Melissa
dc.date2021-11-25T13:36:29.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T12:29:17Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T12:29:17Z
dc.date.issued2015-11-12T13:19:31-08:00
dc.identifierylpr/vol21/iss2/6
dc.identifier.contextkey7838391
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/16988
dc.description.abstractThe constitutional principles that bind our free society instruct that the American people must "hold the judgeship in the highest esteem, that they regard it as the symbol of impartial, fair, and equal justice under law."' Accordingly, in contrast with the political branches, the Supreme Court's decisions "are legitimate only when [the Court] seeks to dissociate itself from individual or group interests, and to judge by disinterested and more objective standards." As Justice Frankfurter said, "justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.
dc.titleThe Impartiality Paradox
dc.source.journaltitleYale Law & Policy Review
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T12:29:17Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylpr/vol21/iss2/6
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1462&context=ylpr&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
16_21YaleL_PolyRev501_2003_.pdf
Size:
1.535Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record