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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Mapping Proportionality Review: Still A "Road To Nowhere", Rachel A. Van Cleave Apr 2008

Mapping Proportionality Review: Still A "Road To Nowhere", Rachel A. Van Cleave

Publications

This article examines how a majority of the Supreme Court went out of its way to vacate a punitive damages award in Philip Morris and further reinforced the inconsistency with which it applies the principle of proportionality. When it comes to punitive damages awards, a majority of Justices continue to convey distrust of juries and of trial and appellate court judges who review these awards. However, when it comes to terms of imprisonment, the Court has eschewed substantive review under the Eighth Amendment while insisting that the Sixth Amendment requires that all facts supporting an increase in a sentence be …


Crisis On The Immigration Bench: An Ethical Perspective, Michele Benedetto Neitz Jan 2008

Crisis On The Immigration Bench: An Ethical Perspective, Michele Benedetto Neitz

Publications

The purpose of this article is to suggest a new lens through which to examine the crisis in immigration courts: judicial ethics. Ethical considerations frequently play a decisive role in the resolution of immigration cases, in part because the outcomes for litigants in immigration courts can depend almost entirely on the attitude of the judge. Accordingly, the acknowledged crisis in immigration courts has severe implications for judicial ethics. Because the term "judicial ethics" encompasses a broad array of principles, this article will narrow its focus to bias and incompetence on the part of immigration judges in the courtroom. Part II …


Extraterritoriality, Antitrust, And The Pragmatist Style, Justin Desautels-Stein Jan 2008

Extraterritoriality, Antitrust, And The Pragmatist Style, Justin Desautels-Stein

Publications

In the last decades of the 20th century, David Kennedy and Martti Koskenniemi made the case that the modern structure of international legal argument was characterized by "pragmatism." Taking this idea as its baseline, this Article's central argument is that legal pragmatism embodies a dominant style of contemporary legal reasoning, and that as Kennedy and Koskenniemi might have suggested, it is on display in some of the canonical antitrust decisions having an international dimension. The Article also seeks to show that pragmatism's ostensible triumph is best understood as a contest of three distinctly legal pragmatisms: "eclectic pragmatism," as evidenced in …