Jordan Steiker
Jordan Steiker is an expert on capital punishment and constitutional law and serves as co-director of the Texas Law Capital Punishment Center. He has written extensively on constitutional law, federal habeas corpus, and the death penalty, including a co-authored report to the American Law Institute prompting the withdrawal of the death penalty provisions of the Model Penal Code. Before joining Texas Law, Professor Steiker served as a law clerk to Justice Thurgood Marshall of the United States Supreme Court.
Justice Kennedy: He swung left on the death penalty but declined to swing for the fences
Carol S. Steiker is the Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Criminal Justice Policy Program at Harvard Law School. Jordan M. Steiker is the Judge Robert M Parker Endowed Chair in Law and Director of the Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law.
Death-penalty symposium: Incremental victories for capital defendants but no sweeping change
Jordan Steiker is the Judge Robert M. Parker Endowed Chair in Law and Director of the Capital Punishment Center at The University of Texas at Austin School of Law.
Opinion analysis: Extending limitations on habeas relief
On Wednesday, in White v. Woodall, the Court reversed a grant of habeas relief by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Argument analysis: Remorseless application of AEDPA?
As in many recent cases applying limits on relief contained in the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s text (AEDPA, 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1)), Wednesday’s argument in White v. Woodall involved mind-numbing hairsplitting.
Argument preview: Varying degrees of speaking and silence
Jordan Steiker is the Judge Robert M. Parker Chair in Law and the Director of the Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law. The Supreme Court is still wrestling with the significance of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) in terms of limiting the role of federal courts in reviewing constitutional claims adjudicated on their merits in state courts.
Opinion analysis: Innocence exception survives, innocence claim does not (Updated)
Jordan Steiker is the Judge Robert M. Parker Chair in Law and Co-Director, Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law. Yesterday a closely divided Court concluded that a proper showing of “actual innocence” is sufficient to circumvent the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s (AEDPA) statute of limitations.
Argument recap: Habeas irony – procedural obstacles might prevent Court from reaching “merits” of procedural issue
Jordan Steiker is the Judge Robert M. Parker Chair in Law and Co-Director, Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law.
Argument preview: Is the innocence exception to procedural obstacles itself subject to procedural obstacles?
Jordan Steiker is the Judge Robert M. Parker Chair in Law and Co-Director of the Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law. State prisoners seeking relief from their convictions via federal habeas have always had to surmount a variety of procedural obstacles to receive a “merits” review of their constitutional claims in federal court.