Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

The Cost Of Good Intentions: Why The Supreme Court's Decision Upholding Affirmative Action Admission Programs Is Detrimental To The Cause, Leslie Yalof Garfield Jan 2006

The Cost Of Good Intentions: Why The Supreme Court's Decision Upholding Affirmative Action Admission Programs Is Detrimental To The Cause, Leslie Yalof Garfield

Pace Law Faculty Publications

This article provides an overview of the Federal Courts’ interpretation of equal protection challenges to affirmative action admission policies beginning with University of California v. Bakke through the recent Supreme Court decisions of Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger. The article then identifies and outlines the appropriate elements of a constitutionally sound affirmative action admission policy. Finally, the article concludes that the permissible policy is almost unattainable for schools other than small institutions.


The Dubitante Opinion, Jason J. Czarnezki Jan 2006

The Dubitante Opinion, Jason J. Czarnezki

Pace Law Faculty Publications

A dubitante (pronounced d[y]oo-bi-tan-tee) opinion indicates that “the judge doubted a legal point but was unwilling to state that it was wrong.” Judges rarely write dubitante opinions or use the term, and informal polling suggests not many legal scholars are aware of the practice. This short essay endeavors to shed some light on the use of the term dubitante in judicial opinions and spark discussion as to the merits of the dubitante opinion--What is a dubitante opinion? When was the term first used, and how often is the term used? Who uses it and how? What are the ...


The Phantom Philosophy? An Empirical Investigation Of Legal Interpretation, Jason J. Czarnezki Jan 2006

The Phantom Philosophy? An Empirical Investigation Of Legal Interpretation, Jason J. Czarnezki

Pace Law Faculty Publications

This Article tests a model of judicial decisionmaking that incorporates elements of both the attitudinal model and the legal model, along with measures of institutional and judicial background characteristics such as collegiality and trial court experience. We develop a measure of interpretive philosophy relying primarily on judicial opinions, which we code for certain indicators of traditional interpretive approaches (i.e., the use of interpretive tools). The critical question is whether judges with similar interpretive philosophies are more likely to agree with one another when deciding cases. Our general finding is that ideology and interpretive philosophy are not significant predictors of ...


Legal Standing For Animals And Advocates, David N. Cassuto Jan 2006

Legal Standing For Animals And Advocates, David N. Cassuto

Pace Law Faculty Publications

For animal advocates, one of the most significant barriers to the courtroom is standing. In order to litigate on behalf of an animal's interests in federal court, the advocate must first establish standing by meeting three requirements: (1) the plaintiff must have suffered an injury in fact, (2) the injury must be causally connected to the act about which the plaintiff is complaining, and (3) the court must be able to redress the injury. When it comes to non-human animals, how does an advocate demonstrate an injury to establish standing? In this panel, experts in animal litigation discuss the ...


Reflections On Brady V. Maryland, Bennett L. Gershman Jan 2006

Reflections On Brady V. Maryland, Bennett L. Gershman

Pace Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Article describes the evolution of the Brady rule over the past forty-three years. Part I sketches the origins of the rule and its doctrinal developments. Part II closely examines Brady's impact on constitutional criminal procedure. Part II suggests that Brady's essential goal has been eroded by the courts, subverted by prosecutors, and ignored by disciplinary bodies. Part III proposes that only through expanding a defendant's right to discovery can the goal of Brady be realized. The Article concludes that Brady, more than any other rule of constitutional criminal procedure, has been the most ...


"Can You Hear Me Now?": Expectations Of Privacy, False Friends, And The Perils Of Speaking Under The Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Donald L. Doernberg Jan 2006

"Can You Hear Me Now?": Expectations Of Privacy, False Friends, And The Perils Of Speaking Under The Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Donald L. Doernberg

Pace Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this article offers a brief history of the development of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and the Court's articulation and application of what has come to be known as the exclusionary rule, which forbids some (but not all) government use of evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Part II focuses on the false-friend cases, elaborating the Court's reasoning and showing why, although the most famous cases involve varying kinds of activity from electronic recording to eavesdropping to simple reporting of the false friend's observation, the Court's method has united these cases under a ...