Content uploaded by Neal Devins
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Neal Devins on Jan 05, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Judicial Vigilantism: Inherent Judicial Authority to Appoint Contempt Prosecutors in Young v. United States Ex Rel Vuitton Et Fils S.A.
Abstract
The authors discuss and criticize a Supreme Court case holding that federal courts have the inherent power to appoint a special contempt prosecutor and oversee the criminal contempt prosecution of parties who have failed to comply with their orders. Such authority violates the separation of powers, they argue. Among other things, it usurps the executive’s power of prosecutorial discretion, which also serves as a crucial protection for the accused.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
supra note 126, at 211-13. ' 43 28
- L Fisher
L. FISHER, supra note 126, at 211-13.
' 43 28 U.S.C.A. § § 49, 591 et seq. (Supp. 1988).
356 U.S. at 577; WatkInS v. United States, 354 U
- Sacher
Sacher, 356 U.S. at 577; WatkInS v. United States, 354 U.S. 178,
208 (1957);
CongressIOnal Investigations and Private Persons, 40 S
- Moreland
Moreland, CongressIOnal Investigations and Private
Persons, 40 S. CAL. L. REv 189 (1967).
- L Fisher
L. FISHER, CONSTITUTIONAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN CONGRESS
AND THE PRESIDENT 184-220 (1985);
Independent Counsel Another, more ObVIOUS analogy IS the EthICS m Government Act provlSlons allowmg for the court appomtment of mdependent counsels by "SpeCIal DIvISIOn" panels. 143 While senous sep
- R Goldfarb
Independent Counsel
Another, more ObVIOUS analogy IS the EthICS m Government
Act provlSlons allowmg for the court appomtment of mdependent counsels by "SpeCIal DIvISIOn" panels. 143 While senous sep-"9 R. GOLDFARB, supra note 42, at 42.