Law Commons^™

Solving The Procedural Puzzles Of The Texas Heartbeat Act And Its Imitators: The Potential For Defensive Litigation, Charles W. "Rocky" Rhodes, Howard M. Wasserman

SMU Law Review

The Texas Heartbeat Act (SB8) prohibits abortions following detection of a fetal heartbeat, a constitutionally invalid ban under current Supreme Court precedent. But the law adopts a unique enforcement scheme—it prohibits enforcement by government officials in favor of private civil actions brought by “any person,” regardless of injury. Texas sought to burden reproductive-health providers and rights advocates with costly litigation and potentially crippling liability.

In a series of articles, we explore how SB8’s exclusive reliance on private enforcement creates procedural and jurisdictional hurdles to challenging the law’s constitutional validity and obtaining judicial review. This piece explores defensive litigation, in which …

The Strange Career Of The Three-Judge District Court: Federalism And Civil Rights, 1954-76, Michael E. Solimine

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The three-judge district court has had a long and strange career in the history of the federal court system. Congress created the court in 1910 as a response to the canonical decision of Ex parte Young two years earlier, which permitted federal court suits against state officials to facilitate constitutional challenges to state laws. The three-judge court statute was a reaction by Progressive Era politicians to such perceived judicial overreach, and required any such challenges to be brought before a specially convened trial court of three judges, with a direct appeal to the Supreme Court available. First established as a …

Why Insurance Contracts Might Be The Trick To Police Reform, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

How do lawsuits deter misconduct? That is an issue that Professor Joanna Schwartz has written about before, and her latest article on the topic, How Governments Pay: Lawsuits, Budgets and Police Reform, could not be more timely. Over the past year, our county has witnessed dramatic instances of police abuse and the public is understandably demanding reform. Schwartz’s terrific article explains why civil rights actions may fail to instigate reform, and suggests how insurance contracts, of all things, can play a role in fixing this problem.

Will Employment Discrimination Class Actions Survive?, Melissa Hart

Akron Law Review

This paper will argue that the changes wrought by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 do not in fact pose a barrier to resolution of employment discrimination claims through class litigation. The addition of compensatory and punitive damages and a jury-trial right in the Civil Rights Act of 1991 may increase the level of scrutiny and perhaps the level of judicial involvement necessary in an employment discrimination class action. But they do not render such a class action either impermissible under Rule 23 or violative of due process or Seventh Amendment jury trial rights. Courts and commentators who insist that …

Idea Class Actions After Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Mark C. Weber

Mark C. Weber

Wal-Mart v. Dukes overturned the certification of a class of a million and a half female employees alleging sex discrimination in Wal-Mart’s salary and promotion decisions. The Supreme Court ruled that the case did not satisfy the requirement that a class have a common question of law or fact, and said that the remedy sought was not the type of relief available under the portion of the class action rule permitting mandatory class actions. Over the last two years, courts have struggled with how to apply the ruling, especially how to apply it beyond its immediate context of employment discrimination …

Access To Counsel In Removal Proceedings: A Case Study For Exploring The Legal And Societal Imperative To Expand The Civil Right To Counsel, Carla L. Reyes

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Although empirical evidence shows that a foreign national's chances of receiving a favorable ruling doubles when an attorney represents him or her in removal proceedings, a unique confluence of history, legal tradition and policy climate have restricted immigrants' access to counsel to a ten-day window in which the immigrant may seek representation of his or her own choosing at no expense to the government. Although removal proceedings are, by definition, civil proceedings, they nevertheless involve physical detention and the possibility of permanent removal from the United States. These circumstances make the immigration system a unique case study for exploration of …

When Rights Become Empty Promises: Promoting An Exclusionary Rule That Vindicates Personal Rights, Robert Bloom, Erin Dewey

Robert Bloom

The United States has played a leading role in the development of the exclusionary rule since Weeks v. United States (1914). The original exclusionary rule justification set out in Weeks is the vindication principle which operates so as to exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence for the purpose of vindicating the rights of the accused. In this way the exclusion of evidence provides a remedy to the victim of an illegality by maintaining the status quo ante. The U.S. Supreme Court observed in Wolf v Colorado (1949) that “[o]f 10 jurisdictions within the United Kingdom and the British Commonwealth of Nations which …

Is The Antidiscrimination Project Being Ended?, Michael J. Zimmer

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

No abstract provided.

Chapters Of The Civil Jury, Doug R. Rendleman

Doug Rendleman

The civil jury, though constitutionally protected by the seventh amendment, has remained a controversial institution throughout much of Anglo-American legal history. Our romantic ideals are questioned by critics who view the civil jury as prejudiced and unpredictable; proponents note the sense of fairness and "earthy wisdom" gained by community participation in the legal process. This debate surfaces in the process of accommodation between certain substantive goals of the law and the pre-verdict and post-verdict procedural devices courts have employed to control the jury. In this article, Professor Rendleman examines this conflict in his three "chapters" involving racially motivated discharges of …

University Of Baltimore Symposium Report: Debut Of “The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America”, Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal

Zena Denise Crenshaw-Logal

On the first of each two day symposium of the Fogg symposia, lawyers representing NGOs in the civil rights, judicial reform, and whistleblower advocacy fields are to share relevant work of featured legal scholars in lay terms; relate the underlying principles to real life cases; and propose appropriate reform efforts. Four (4) of the scholars spend the next day relating their featured articles to views on the vitality of stare decisis. Specifically, the combined panels of public interest attorneys and law professors consider whether compliance with the doctrine is reasonably assured in America given the: 1. considerable discretion vested in …

Beyond Common Sense: A Social Psychological Study Of Iqbal's Effect On Claims Of Race Discrimination, Victor D. Quintanilla

Victor D. Quintanilla

This article examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) from a social psychological perspective, and empirically studies Iqbal’s effect on claims of race discrimination.

In Twombly and then Iqbal, the Court recast Rule 8 from a notice-based rule into a plausibility standard. Under Iqbal, federal judges must evaluate whether each complaint contains sufficient factual matter “to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” When doing so, Iqbal requires judges to draw on their “judicial experience and common sense.” Courts apply Iqbal at the pleading stage, before evidence has been …

When Rights Become Empty Promises: Promoting An Exclusionary Rule That Vindicates Personal Rights, Robert Bloom, Erin Dewey

Robert M. Bloom

The United States has played a leading role in the development of the exclusionary rule since Weeks v. United States (1914). The original exclusionary rule justification set out in Weeks is the vindication principle which operates so as to exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence for the purpose of vindicating the rights of the accused. In this way the exclusion of evidence provides a remedy to the victim of an illegality by maintaining the status quo ante. The U.S. Supreme Court observed in Wolf v Colorado (1949) that “[o]f 10 jurisdictions within the United Kingdom and the British Commonwealth of Nations which …

Pearson, Iqbal, And Procedural Judicial Activism, Goutam U. Jois

Goutam U Jois

In its most recent term, the Supreme Court decided Pearson v. Callahan and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, two cases that, even at this early date, can safely be called “game-changers.” What is fairly well known is that Iqbal and Pearson, on their own terms, will hurt civil rights plaintiffs. A point that has not been explored is how the interaction between Iqbal and Pearson will also hurt civil rights plaintiffs. First, the cases threaten to catch plaintiffs on the horns of a dilemma: Iqbal says, in effect, that greater detail is required to get allegations past the motion to dismiss stage. …

Color-Blind: Procedure's Quiet But Crucial Role In Achieving Racial Justice, Benjamin V. Madison Iii

Benjamin V Madison, III

This article explores the role of procedural institutions, both in the Constitution and in other laws related to the judicial system, that promote impartial justice. The article explores the twin principles of human fallibility and the equality of all human beings as the fundamental bases of the judicial system. The role of procedure in enabling federal courts to enforce the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education is a featured part of the article.

Pleading Civil Rights Claims In The Post-Conley Era, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Much has been made of the Supreme Court's recent pronouncements on federal civil pleading standards during the latter half of the 2006-2007 Term. Specifically, what will be the fallout from the Court's decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, a case that abrogated Conley v. Gibson's famous "no set of facts" formulation and supplanted it with a new plausibility pleading standard? This Article attempts to examine and distill the impact of Twombly on the pleading standards that lower federal courts are applying when scrutinizing civil rights claims. Two main approaches emerge: that of courts choosing to continue to apply a …

Pleading Civil Rights Claims In The Post-Conley Era, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Much has been made of the Supreme Court's recent pronouncements on federal civil pleading standards during the latter half of the 2006-2007 Term. Specifically, what will be the fallout from the Court's decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, a case that abrogated Conley v. Gibson's famous no set of facts formulation and supplanted it with a new plausibility pleading standard? This Article attempts to examine and distill the impact of Twombly on the pleading standards that lower federal courts are applying when scrutinizing civil rights claims. Two main approaches emerge: that of courts that choose to continue to apply …

Section 1983, Honorable George C. Pratt, Martin A. Schwartz, Leon Friedman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Presumed Frivolous: Application Of Stringent Pleading Requirements In Civil Rights Litigation, Douglas A. Blaze

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Of Virginia V. Consumers Union Of The United States, Inc., Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

New York City Transit Authority V. Beazer, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Numbers Game - The Use And Misuse Of Statistics In Civil Rights Litigation, Marcy M. Hallock

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Chapters Of The Civil Jury, Doug R. Rendleman

Faculty Publications

The civil jury, though constitutionally protected by the seventh amendment, has remained a controversial institution throughout much of Anglo-American legal history. Our romantic ideals are questioned by critics who view the civil jury as prejudiced and unpredictable; proponents note the sense of fairness and "earthy wisdom" gained by community participation in the legal process. This debate surfaces in the process of accommodation between certain substantive goals of the law and the pre-verdict and post-verdict procedural devices courts have employed to control the jury. In this article, Professor Rendleman examines this conflict in his three "chapters" involving racially motivated discharges of …

Recent Developments, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Frontiers Of The Federal Mandamus Statute, Bruce Comly French

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Albemarle Paper Co. V. Moody, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Milliken V. Bradley, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Mcdonnell Douglas V. Green, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.