Judge Michael Luttig is a renowned American jurist and lawyer, best known for his service as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Born on June 13, 1954, in Tyler, Texas, Luttig developed a strong interest in law from an early age. He pursued his undergraduate degree at the University of Pennsylvania, where he graduated magna cum laude in 1976. Luttig then went on to attend the University of Virginia School of Law, earning his Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree in 1981.
Early Career and Judicial Appointments
Following his graduation from law school, Luttig clerked for Judge Harvey Wilkinson III on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. This experience played a significant role in shaping his understanding of the judicial system and ultimately paved the way for his future appointments. In 1991, Luttig was appointed as the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel at the United States Department of Justice, a position that allowed him to work closely with the federal government on various legal matters. His work in this capacity earned him recognition and respect within the legal community, leading to his nomination to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1991.
Notable Cases and Judicial Philosophy
During his tenure on the Fourth Circuit, Judge Luttig presided over numerous high-profile cases, often taking a conservative approach to judicial decision-making. One of his most notable opinions was in the case of Riggs v. Procter & Gamble Co., where he ruled that the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution did not grant the federal government the authority to regulate certain aspects of interstate commerce. This decision reflected his commitment to judicial restraint and limited government intervention in economic matters. Luttig’s judicial philosophy, which emphasizes the importance of adhering to the original intent of the Constitution, has been influential in shaping the jurisprudence of the Fourth Circuit.
| Case | Year | Decision |
|---|---|---|
| Riggs v. Procter & Gamble Co. | 1995 | Reversed and remanded |
| United States v. Councilman | 2005 | Affirmed |
Post-Judicial Career and Legacy
In 2006, Judge Luttig resigned from the Fourth Circuit to pursue a career in private practice, joining the law firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP as a partner. This move allowed him to leverage his extensive experience and expertise in advising clients on complex legal matters. Luttig’s legacy as a jurist continues to be felt, with many of his opinions remaining seminal authorities in their respective areas of law. His commitment to upholding the principles of the Constitution and his dedication to the rule of law have earned him a lasting reputation as one of the most respected judges of his generation.
Impact on the Legal Community
Judge Luttig’s influence extends beyond his judicial opinions, as he has also played a significant role in shaping the legal community through his mentorship and teaching. He has taught law at several prestigious institutions, including the University of Virginia School of Law and Harvard Law School, imparting his knowledge and experience to future generations of lawyers and judges. Luttig’s contributions to the legal community have been recognized through various awards and honors, including the Edmund Randolph Award for outstanding service to the judiciary.
- University of Virginia School of Law, Instructor (1995-2000)
- Harvard Law School, Visiting Professor (2002-2003)
- Edmund Randolph Award (2007)
What is Judge Luttig’s most notable opinion?
+One of Judge Luttig’s most notable opinions is in the case of Riggs v. Procter & Gamble Co., where he ruled that the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution did not grant the federal government the authority to regulate certain aspects of interstate commerce.
What is Judge Luttig’s judicial philosophy?
+Judge Luttig’s judicial philosophy emphasizes the importance of judicial restraint and adherence to the original intent of the Constitution. He believes in limited government intervention in economic matters and has consistently applied this approach in his opinions.
