loader from loading.io

“The Ballot is Stronger than the Bullet”*: A Discussion of Shelby County v. Holder

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Release Date: 02/17/2021

Season 3: Episode 5: RBG, Justice Marshall and the Death Penalty (Part 2) show art Season 3: Episode 5: RBG, Justice Marshall and the Death Penalty (Part 2)

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 3, Episode 5 of Notorious, we continue to discuss the ’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment – from Justice Marshall’s viewpoint, as well as Justice Ginsburg’s viewpoint.  This topic is broken up into two episodes, with Episode 5 focusing mostly on Justice Ginsburg’s views and how those views intersect with those of Justice Marshall. attorneys , and discuss the history of the death penalty, as well as the cases of and , and the impact of their legal legacy on future capital punishment jurisprudence. Related Resources: For a selection of Justice...

info_outline
Season 3: Episode 4:  RBG, Justice Marshall and the Death Penalty (Part 1) show art Season 3: Episode 4: RBG, Justice Marshall and the Death Penalty (Part 1)

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 3, Episode 4 of Notorious, we discuss the ’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment – from  Justice Marshall’s viewpoint, as well as Justice Ginsburg’s viewpoint.  This topic is broken up into two episodes, with Episode 4 focusing mostly on Justice Marshall’s views and historical context. attorneys , and discuss the history of the death penalty, as well as the cases of and , and the impact of their legal legacy on future capital punishment jurisprudence. Related Resources: For a selection of Justice Ginsburg’s writings, see , edited by . For more...

info_outline
Season 3: Episode 3: Justice Ginsburg and Justice Marshall’s Views on Campaign Finance show art Season 3: Episode 3: Justice Ginsburg and Justice Marshall’s Views on Campaign Finance

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 3, Episode 3 of Notorious, we discuss campaign finance, from legal viewpoints of Justices Ginsburg and Marshall. Among the issues discussed are what it means to participate in a fair and free election and the intersection between money and its impact on free speech during a political campaign.  Guests will include Patterson Belknap Partner and Patterson Belknap Associates and . Related Resources: For a selection of Justice Ginsburg’s writings, see , edited by . For more information about , see . For information about becoming a guest on Notorious, email . For questions or...

info_outline
Justice Marshall & Justice Ginsburg First Amendment Jurisprudence show art Justice Marshall & Justice Ginsburg First Amendment Jurisprudence

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 3, Episode 2 of Notorious, we discuss the First Amendment and how it was addressed by Justice Ginsburg and Justice Marshall. Specifically, this episode will cover Justice Ginsburg’s and Justice Marshall’s jurisprudence concerning the religious clauses of the First Amendment, including the Establish Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. Guests will include Patterson Belknap Partner ; Patterson Belknap Counsel ; and Patterson Belknap Associates and . Related Resources: For a selection of Justice Ginsburg’s writings, see , edited by . For more information about , see . For...

info_outline
Season 3, Episode 1: Justice Marshall & Justice Ginsburg’s Judicial Philosophies show art Season 3, Episode 1: Justice Marshall & Justice Ginsburg’s Judicial Philosophies

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 3, Episode 1 of Notorious, we discuss Justice Thurgood Marshall’s and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s contributions to the Civil Rights Movement, and parallels and differences between their legal and judicial strategies. Guests will include , who currently sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and previously sat on the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey; , Patterson Belknap Of Counsel and former judicial clerk to Justice Marshall; Patterson Belknap Partner ; and Patterson Belknap Associate . Related Resources: For a selection of Justice...

info_outline
Season 2: Episode 6: 2020-2021 Supreme Court Term show art Season 2: Episode 6: 2020-2021 Supreme Court Term

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 2, Episode 6 of Notorious, we discuss the 2020-2021 Supreme Court Term and look back at specific cases and instances where Justice Ginsburg’s influence is still alive and well. Specifically, we discuss the cases, FDA v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System, Tanzin v. Tanvir, and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

info_outline
Season 2: Episode 5:  A Discussion of Ricci v. DeStefano show art Season 2: Episode 5: A Discussion of Ricci v. DeStefano

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 2, Episode 5 of Notorious, we discuss the case of Ricci v. DeStefano, which involved the question of whether the city of New Haven, Connecticut violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act when it rejected the results of a civil service exam given to firefighters. The results of the exam showed that white candidates had out-performed minority candidates and the question was raised as to whether the exam was discriminatory.

info_outline
Season 2: Episode 4:  A Discussion of Adarand Construction v. Pena show art Season 2: Episode 4: A Discussion of Adarand Construction v. Pena

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 2, Episode 4 of Notorious, we discuss the case of Adarand Construction v. Pena, which involved whether a federal statute, which provided for favor treatment to a suspect class to remedy past discrimination, violated the Equal Protection Clause as embodied in the Fifth Amendment.

info_outline
Season 2: Episode 3:  A Discussion of Grutter v. Bollinger show art Season 2: Episode 3: A Discussion of Grutter v. Bollinger

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 2, Episode 3 of Notorious, we discuss the case of Grutter v. Bollinger, which involved the question of whether a law school admissions policy that considered race as a factor in admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

info_outline
Season 2: Episode 2: A Discussion of Gonzales v. Carhart show art Season 2: Episode 2: A Discussion of Gonzales v. Carhart

Notorious: The Legal Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

In Season 2, Episode 2 of Notorious, we discuss the case of Gonzales v. Carhart, which involved the Supreme Court’s consideration of the constitutionality of The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (“the Act”). In 2003, Congress passed and President Bush signed the Act into law. Dr. LeRoy Carhart and other physicians, who performed late term abortions, sued to stop the Act from going into effect. A federal district court agreed and ruled the Act unconstitutional.

info_outline
 
More Episodes

Featuring guest speakers, Kerry AbramsGuy-Uriel Charles, and Neil Siegel of Duke University School of Law. 

In Episode 7 of Notorious, we discuss the case of Shelby County v. Holder.  The U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  The provisions at issue were Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to receive federal preclearance prior to implementing changes to their voting laws or practices; and Section 4(b), which provides the coverage formula for determining which state and local governments are subjected to preclearance due to histories of discrimination in voting.

The Court ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that Section 4(b) was unconstitutional.  Writing the Court’s opinion, Chief Justice Roberts found that because the coverage formula was based on outdated data, it was no longer responsive to current needs; therefore, the coverage formula was an impermissible burden on the constitutional principles of federalism and state sovereignty.  Although the Court did not strike down Section 5, it was essentially rendered moot without the enactment of a new coverage formula by Congress.

Justice Ginsburg wrote a blistering dissent, joined by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan, which she uncharacteristically delivered from the bench.  Notably, the dissent reasoned: “The sad irony of today’s decision lies in its utter failure to grasp why the [Voting Rights Act] has proven effective ... Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet."

Kerry Abrams, James B. Duke and Benjamin N. Duke Dean of the School of Law, Duke University School of Law, joined by Duke Law professors, Guy-Uriel Charles and Neil Siegel, and Patterson Belknap associate and Duke Law alumnus, Hyatt Howard, discuss the different views expressed by the majority and dissent, as well as the history of voting rights and discrimination in the United States. 

Related Resources:

For a selection of Justice Ginsburg’s writings, see Decisions and Dissents of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:  A Selection, edited by Corey Brettschneider.

For more information about Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, see www.pbwt.com.

For information about becoming a guest on Notorious, email Michelle Bufano.

For questions or more information about Notorious, email Jenni Dickson.

Also, check out the Patterson Belknap podcast, How to Build A Nation in 15 Weeks.

*Abraham Lincoln, May 26, 1856