header-logo header-logo

18 November 2020 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 7911 / Categories: Features , International justice , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

At sixes & sevens

32374
Athelstane Aamodt reflects on ‘originalist’ Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment to the US Supreme Court

The recent confirmation of the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court of the United States has aroused much controversy. Appointments to the Supreme Court always do, not least because of the great power that the Court possesses, ie it can strike down legislation as being unconstitutional. The view is that the appointment of Barrett gives the court a 6-3 bias in favour of ‘originalists’, judges who interpret the meaning of the US constitution as it would have been understood at the time it was promulgated. This point of view, which is conservative, tends to produce judgments that Republicans approve of, although that is not always the case.

The big fear of Democrats, who are largely pro-choice, is that the decision in the case of Roe v Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973), which established a woman’s right to abortion, will be overturned. Such is that fear that President-elect Joe Biden has said he would

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll