Pepperdine University School of Law

News and Events

A Look Back at Year One

Symposium Addresses Rookie Year of the Roberts Court and Glances Forward.

story > Thomas G. Griffinn IV (JD '06) with assistance from Siobhan Cullen (3L)

Pepperdine University School of Law has earned a reputation for presenting dynamic, relevant, and nationally acclaimed symposia on today's most important legal issues. Many of the nation's leading constitutional scholars, including several professors at the School of Law, ensured the tradition will continue, opening the Fall 2006 symposium season with The Rookie Year of the Roberts Court and a Look Ahead. A tremendous success, the August 30 symposium put the U.S. Supreme Court's recent term under a magnifying glass.


Professor Doug Kmiec

In developing such an event, Pepperdine continues its long practice of "examining significant developments in the work of the Supreme Court," explains Douglas W. Kmiec, Caruso Family Chair and professor of constitutional law. The symposium focused on the court's recent decisions and the impact of newly appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito. Thus, panelists, guests, faculty, and students were able to reflect upon a year when, according to Professor Kmiec, "The Roberts Court has demonstrated some remarkable unanimity and collegiality while examining highly sensitive topics ranging from abortion to presidential power and the war on terror to political gerrymandering and campaign financing, and more."


Dean Ken Starr

"It's a new day," said School of Law dean Ken Starr, opening the proceedings with a welcome address and introductions. Dean Starr, along with Professor Kmiec, served as host conveners of the program, and welcomed a panel of leading constitutional scholars including Professor Akhil Reed Amar of the Yale Law School (and D and L Straus Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law at Pepperdine, Fall 2005 and 2006), Professor Erwin Chemerinsky of Duke Law School, and Provost Elizabeth Garrett of USC Law School.


Pepperdine Professors James
McGoldrick and Bernard James

The panelists reflected upon the cases decided by the court, as well as the confirmation process of Roberts and Alito. After delivering their commentary, the panelists fielded questions from prominent legal journalists: David Savage of the Los Angeles Times, Gina Holland of the Associated Press, and Marcia Coyle, Washington, D.C., bureau chief and correspondent for the National Law Journal. In addition, School of Law faculty and constitutional law professors Bernard James, James McGoldrick, Jr., and Robert Pushaw participated, asking their own questions and those raised by some of the more than 420 attendees.

In scrutinizing Supreme Court decisions and trends since the addition of chief justice Roberts and associate justice Alito, the symposium was broken into several categories, with each panelist addressing the cases decided within a particular field of law.


Professor Ahkil Reed Amar

Professor Amar discussed criminal justice developments and spoke about one of the most significant Supreme Court shifts, the 5-4 vote in Hudson v. Michigan, and the resulting weakening of the exclusionary evidence rule. In Professor Amar's view, the Supreme Court may be moving toward allowing for civil remedies in certain cases where citizens have been subjected to illegal searches, rather than excluding relevant evidence, such as contraband, from such searches.

Dean Starr spoke about the court's renewed interest in business cases. Drawing on his own recent Supreme Court work as counsel for various commercial enterprises, Dean Starr embraced the possible shift in the court's thinking about the cases it takes and urged it to issue opinions that will provide consistency, stability, and predictability.


Duke Professor Erwin Chemerinsky

Other panelists discussed more contentious topics amongst themselves. Professors Kmiec and Chemerinsky debated the notion of whether, by virtue of his "swing vote" status, the court should be properly called the "Kennedy Court." Additionally, dialogue between Kmiec and Chemerinsky about Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, (the controversial holding finding the Bush Administration's system of military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees to violate both the Geneva convention and federal law), yielded spirited interaction and debate.


Provost Elizabeth Garrett

Provost Garrett delivered a vigorous review of the political process cases recently decided by the court. She argued that lower courts, (especially in the recent pre-Roberts past), have been left with limited guidance, while also conceding that "the Supreme Court can't control how its precedent is used."

To conclude the symposium, journalists Savage, Holland, and Coyle shared their insights about the Roberts Court rookie year, as well as their experiences at the justices' confirmation hearings. Holland summed up what appeared to be many of the panelists' impressions of the newly minted chief justice: "On the bench, he's right at home."

The Rookie Year of the Roberts Court and A Look Ahead was taped for C-SPAN's program, "America & the Courts," and excerpts of the symposium aired September 2 and 9. Segments are available for viewing at www.c-span.org, on the "American & the Courts" page; streaming video of the entire symposium is available on the School of Law Web site.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy