Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Bankruptcy (4)
- Courts (4)
- Judges (4)
- Appeals (3)
- Appellate Structure (3)
-
- Supreme Court (3)
- Court Reform (2)
- Empirical (2)
- Administration (1)
- Appellate Litigation (1)
- Bankruptcy Appellate Panels (1)
- Criminal Justice (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- European Law (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Forum Selling (1)
- German Court (1)
- German Law (1)
- Judicial Discretion (1)
- Judicial Function (1)
- Judicial Restraint (1)
- Judicial Review (1)
- Jurisdiction Stripping (1)
- Legal Ethics (1)
- Means Test (1)
- Public Defense (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell
The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell
Scholarship@WashULaw
Jurisdiction stripping is seen as a nuclear option. Its logic is simple: by depriving federal courts of jurisdiction over some set of cases, Congress ensures those courts cannot render bad decisions. In theory, it frees up the political branches and the states to act without fear of judicial second-guessing. To its proponents, it offers the ultimate check on unelected and unaccountable judges. To critics, it poses a grave threat to the separation of powers. Both sides agree, though, that jurisdiction stripping is a powerful weapon. On this understanding, politicians, activists, and scholars throughout American history have proposed jurisdiction stripping measures …
Supreme Court Reform And American Democracy, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
Supreme Court Reform And American Democracy, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
Scholarship@WashULaw
In "How to Save the Supreme Court," we identified the legitimacy challenge facing the Court, traced it to a set of structural flaws, and proposed novel reforms. Little more than a year later, the conversation around Supreme Court reform has only grown louder and more urgent. In this Essay, we continue that conversation by engaging with critics of our approach. The current crisis of the Supreme Court is, we argue, inextricable from the question of the Supreme Court’s proper role in our democracy. For those interested in reform, there are three distinct strategies for ensuring the Supreme Court maintains its …
The Defender General, Daniel Epps, William Ortman
The Defender General, Daniel Epps, William Ortman
Scholarship@WashULaw
The United States needs a Defender General—a public official charged with representing the collective interests of criminal defendants before the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is effectively our nation’s chief regulator of criminal justice. But in the battle to influence the Court’s rulemaking, government interests have substantial structural advantages. As compared to counsel for defendants, government lawyers—and particularly those from the U.S. Solicitor General’s office—tend to be more experienced advocates who have more credibility with the Court. Most importantly, government lawyers can act strategically to play for bigger long-term victories, while defense lawyers must zealously advocate …
Forum Selling Abroad, Jens Frankenreiter, Stefan Bechtold, Daniel Klerman
Forum Selling Abroad, Jens Frankenreiter, Stefan Bechtold, Daniel Klerman
Scholarship@WashULaw
Judges decide cases. Do they also try to influence which cases they decide? Clearly plaintiffs “shop” for the most attractive forum, but do judges try to attract cases by “selling” their courts? Some American judges actively try to enlarge their influence by making their courts attractive to plaintiffs, a phenomenon known as “forum selling.” This article shows that forum selling occurs outside the U.S. as well, focusing on Germany, a country that is often held up as the paragon of the civil law approach to adjudication. As in the U.S., German courts attract cases primarily through the pro-plaintiff manipulation of …
Rethinking The Principal-Agent Theory Of Judging, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
Rethinking The Principal-Agent Theory Of Judging, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
Scholarship@WashULaw
This Essay offers new insights into understanding the relationship between higher and lower courts and responds to the extant literature that has characterized the relationship as one involving a principal and an agent. We challenge the underpinnings of the principal-agent understanding of judicial hierarchies and identify problems with the theory’s applicability in this context. While principals ordinarily select their agents, higher court judges usually do not select lower court judges. Moreover, while lower court judges may cast votes with an eye to the possibility of elevation to a higher court, the higher court judges who review the lower court’s decisions …
Does Ideology Matter In Bankruptcy? Voting Behavior On The Courts Of Appeals, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
Does Ideology Matter In Bankruptcy? Voting Behavior On The Courts Of Appeals, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
Scholarship@WashULaw
This Article empirically examines the question of whether courts of appeals judges cast ideological votes in the context of bankruptcy. The empirical study is unique insofar as it is the first to specifically examine the voting behavior of circuit court judges in bankruptcy cases. More importantly, it focuses on a particular type of dispute that arises in bankruptcy - debt-dischargeability determinations. The study implements this focused approach in order to reduce heterogeneity in result. We find, contrary to our hypotheses, no evidence that circuit court judges engage in ideological voting in bankruptcy cases. We do find, however, non-ideological factors - …
An Empirical Investigation Into Appellate Structure And The Perceived Quality Of Appellate Review, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
An Empirical Investigation Into Appellate Structure And The Perceived Quality Of Appellate Review, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
Scholarship@WashULaw
Commentators have theorized that several factors may improve the process, and thus perhaps the accuracy, of appellate review: (1) review by a panel of judges, (2) subject-matter expertise in the area of the appeal, (3) other law-finding ability, (4) adherence to traditional notions of appellate hierarchy, and (5) the judicial independence of appellate judges. The considerable discussion that has expounded upon these theories has occurred in a vacuum of abstract generalization. This Paper adds a new dimension by presenting results from an empirical study of bankruptcy appellate opinions issued over a three-year period. The federal bankruptcy appellate structure provides certain …
Eliminating The Judicial Function In Consumer Bankruptcy, Rafael I. Pardo
Eliminating The Judicial Function In Consumer Bankruptcy, Rafael I. Pardo
Scholarship@WashULaw
The centerpiece of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 has been the means test, a formulaic statutory directive pursuant to which courts are to presume abuse of the bankruptcy system by Chapter 7 debtors who have an ability to repay past debts with future income. This Essay provides a new insight into means testing by arguing that, more than anything else, it has brought about a significant change in the institutional design of bankruptcy courts: namely, the increased blurring of administrative and judicial functions. The Essay concludes that this development should be cause for concern as …