Law Commons^™

Fulfilling The Promise Of Payne: Creating Participatory Opportunities For Survivors In Capital Cases, Megan A. Mullett

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Not The Crime But The Cover-Up: A Deterrence-Based Rationale For The Premeditation-Deliberation Formula, Michael J. Zydney Mannheimer

Indiana Law Journal

Beginning with Pennsylvania in 1794, most American jurisdictions have, at one time or another, separated the crime of murder into two degrees based on the presence or absence of premeditation and deliberation. An intentional, premeditated, and deliberate murder is murder of the first degree, while second-degree murder is committed intentionally but without premeditation or deliberation. The distinction was created in order to limit the use of the death penalty, which generally has been imposed only for first-degree murder.

Critics have attacked the premeditation-deliberation formula on two fronts. First, they have charged that the formula is imprecise as a measure of …

The Roberts Court And Freedom Of Speech, Erwin Chemerinsky

Federal Communications Law Journal

This is an edited version of a speech delivered on December 16, 2010 in Washington, D.C., as part of the Federal Communications Bar Association's Distinguished Speaker Series.

This speech was given by Dean Erwin Chemerinsky in December 2010 as part of the FCBA's Distinguished Speaker Series. In the speech, Dean Chemerinsky offers his perspectives on and analysis of the Supreme Court's position on freedom of speech in recent years. He highlights important recent freedom of speech decisions made by the Roberts Court, and gives some projections as to where the court is heading in the years to come, given its …

Procedure's Ambiguity, Mark Moller

Indiana Law Journal

By leaving the meaning of a statute—or procedural rule—undecided, ambiguous appellate decisions create space for lower courts to adopt a blend of conflicting approaches, yielding an average result that trims between competing preferences. While compromising in this way may seem to flout basic norms of good judging, this Article shows that opaque “compromise” opinions have plausible normative appeal, given premises about good interpretation often labeled “pluralist.” Judicial pluralists think courts should decide cases in ways interest groups would, hypothetically, accept. To demonstrate the pluralist appeal of opaque decisions, I develop, in turn, two related claims: First, interest groups, under the …

Fundamental Versus Deferential: Appellate Review Of Terminations Of Parental Rights, Karen A. Wyle

Indiana Law Journal

Any attorney who handles or follows cases involving termination of parental rights will have often read, “This court has long had a highly deferential standard of review in cases concerning the termination of parental rights.” This article addresses several questions that arise from that familiar language:

• Does the Indiana Court of Appeals in fact have a tradition or practice of highly deferential review of termination orders?
• Is this deference greater than the court accords to trial court decisions in other family law matters or in non-family civil appeals?
• If so, on what legal analysis is this special deference based?
• Is …

The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Alexander A. Reinert

Indiana Law Journal

In Conley v. Gibson, the Supreme Court announced its commitment to a liberal pleading regime in federal civil cases, and for decades thereafter was steadfast in resisting ad hoc heightened pleading rules adopted by lower courts. Thus, from 1957 until a few years ago, most litigants could count on surviving a motion to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim so long as their pleading provided some minimal notice to the defendant of the nature of their claim. Enter Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly. Iqbal and Twombly, by many accounts, two-stepped the Court from …

Section 1983 Wrongful Death And Survival Actions In The Seventh Circuit: An Indiana Litigant's Guide To Claims After Russ V. Watts, Michelle R. Gough

Indiana Law Journal

The availability of survival and wrongful death damages in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cases is an area that involves both changing precedent and unaddressed issues within the Seventh Circuit. In both of the aforementioned types of claims, the cases will necessarily involve the tangled application of both state and federal law, and the Seventh Circuit and other federal courts of appeals have struggled to provide a clear, coherent approach to these issues. Indeed, there is strong disagreement among the circuits. Dean Steven H. Steinglass offered the most comprehensive discussion of the nature of both types of claims under § 1983 …

Respect My Authority: Analyzing Claims Of Diminished U.S. Supreme Court Influence Abroad, Aaron B. Aft

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

This paper critiques the argument that the U.S. Supreme Court is losing influence among national and constitutional courts worldwide as a result of its nonparticipation in the emerging judicial globalization. It does so, inter alia, by reviewing two examples of how U.S. authority is cited abroad, and concludes that arguments of diminished influence appear overstated, and that changes in U.S. judicial influence are not likely due to attitudes toward citation of foreign law.