L-R: Chief Justice Max Baer of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor of Supreme Court of Ohio, Chief Justice Donald W. Beatty of South Carolina Supreme Court, and Chief Justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court Paul Suttell. Courtesy photos
A panel of state Supreme Court chief justices agreed that subscribing to any one distinct method of evaluating the law, particularly originalism, is ineffective.
In a panel on judicial decision-making Friday, Chief Justices Max Baer of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Donald W. Beatty of the South Carolina Supreme Court, Maureen O’Connor of the Ohio Supreme Court, and Paul A. Suttell of the Rhode Island Supreme Court discussed the factors they weigh when analyzing their respective state constitutions, from plain text to legislative history and intent to the consequences of their decisions.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
