Amanda L. Tyler
90 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1572
In 2003, Columbia Law School marked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s first ten years on the Supreme Court with a symposium. There, Harvard Law School Professor David Shapiro offered an assessment of those ten years with a specific focus on her contributions in the fields of procedure and federal jurisdiction. This piece picks up where Professor Shapiro left off and assesses the balance of Justice Ginsburg’s contributions in these same fields during her latter seventeen years on the Court. Her opinions on procedure and jurisdiction from this period span a range of issues, including preclusion, abstention, standing, arbitration, forum non conveniens, pleading standards, burdens of proof, subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, joinder, governmental and officer liability and immunity, habeas corpus, territorial jurisdiction, congressional control over the judicial power, mootness, and appellate jurisdiction, just to name a few.
As Professor Shapiro wrote in his earlier assessment, Justice Ginsburg’s opinions are “characterized by qualities that evince judging at its best.” The more recent examples explored here underscore the correctness of his appraisal and shed light on additional aspects of Justice Ginsburg’s legacy, including her steadfast commitment to making the legal system (especially the federal courts) more accessible and to promoting constitutional accountability of government entities and officials. In all, this article reveals how during her forty years as a federal judge—twenty-seven of them on the Supreme Court— Justice Ginsburg heralded the importance of procedural integrity in our legal system while pursuing gender equality and a larger vision of what our country could be—a “more perfect Union.”
