English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

O THER court in the world is called upon to resolve judicial controversies of such importance as those presented to the Supreme Court of the United States. The time available to the nine Justices is patently inadequate for them properly to decide the vital issues before them and to explain satisfactorily the reasons for the results they reach.' It is, therefore, unfortunate that the Court should be called upon to spend its time and energy in the decision of cases that have no importance except to the litigants themselves, 2 who will ordinarily have had at least one hearing on appeal. It is equally unfortunate that so much of the Justices' time should be occupied with the resolution of questions about the Court's own jurisdiction concerning only the allocation of business within the federal system.3 The problem presented by the unimportant cases can be solved in large measure by the Court itself through a wiser utilization of its discretionary power to refuse review. Insofar, however, as such cases come to the Court by way of appeal as of right, the Court would require the assistance of Congress for their elimination from the crowded docket, just as avoidance of the jurisdictional ques-

The Mersky Case and the Criminal Appeals Act: A Suggestion for Amendment of the Statute