Fair and Just Courts

The End of Choice?

Nov. 4 could be the beginning of the end for the right to choose. In this video, we lay out some scary math.

Ads: Senators Who Put George W. Bush -- Not Their Constituents -- First

As part of People For the American Way's Save the Court campaign, we're running ads in key states targeting senators who voted against their constituents' interests by supporting George W. Bush's extreme judicial nominees. The ads below call out senators who sided with Bush when it came to judicial nominees whose decisions had very real — and negative — impacts on families in their state.

More Rights At Stake: A Preview of the Supreme Court's 2008-09 Term

A report from People For the American Way Foundation on a selection of cases the Supreme Court will consider in the term beginning October 6, 2008. In the 2008-09 term, the Court is set to consider a number of important cases involving voting rights, employment discrimination, free speech, and access to justice.

The Human Toll: How Individual Americans Have Fared at the Hands of Bush Judges

People For the American Way Foundation has documented in a series of reports the damage that Bush nominated judges have done to the Constitution — and to Americans' ability to seek and expect justice in the federal courts when challenging unlawful treatment by corporations, government agencies, and other powerful entities. This report looks at a selection of cases with an eye to the human cost of a federal judiciary dominated by an ideology that is all too willing to sacrifice individual rights and legal protections.

Federal Judge Terrence Boyle Unfit for Promotion to Appeals Court

Record as a Judge Shows High Reversal Rate, Troubling Rulings on Individual Rights

A People For the American Way Analysis of Boyle’s Judicial Record

Federal Judge Terrence Boyle Unfit for Promotion to Appeals Court

Judge Boyle has been reversed by the Supreme Court in several decisions favoring white plaintiff voters in redistricting cases. These include opinions he authored in Cromartie v. Hunt, (Cromartie I), 34 F. Supp 2d 1029 (E.D.N.C. 1998), rev’d 526 U.S. 541 (1999), and Cromartie v. Hunt (Cromartie II), 133 F. Supp. 2d 407 (E.D.N.C. 2000), rev’d sub nom Easley v. Cormartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001). In addition, in Cannon v. North Carolina State Board of Education, 917 F.Supp. 387 (E.D.N.C.

Federal Judge Terrence Boyle Unfit for Promotion to Appeals Court

In criminal cases, the Fourth Circuit defines a “plain error” as one that is obvious, detrimentally affects the rights of the defendant, and is so egregious as to implicate the “fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. . .” United States v. Bellamy, 264 F.3d 448, 445 (4th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1143 (2002). This very strong language makes it clear that plain error is not a term used by the Circuit to describe harmless or justifiable mistakes.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious