Law Commons^™

Supreme Court Fact-Finding And The Distortion Of American Democracy: Hearing Before The Subcommittee On Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action And Federal Rights Of The Committee On The Judiciary, Senate, One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, First Session, Allison Orr Larsen

Congressional Testimony

No abstract provided.

Virtual Briefing At The Supreme Court, Jeffrey L. Fisher, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

The open secret of Supreme Court advocacy in a digital era is that there is a new way to argue to the Justices. Today's Supreme Court arguments are developed online: they are dissected and explored in blog posts, fleshed out in popular podcasts, and analyzed and re-analyzed by experts who do not represent the parties or have even filed a brief in the case at all. This "virtual briefing" (as we call it) is intended to influence the Justices and their law clerks but exists completely outside of traditional briefing rules. This article describes virtual briefing and makes a case …

Amicus Curiae Observations On The “Prosecution’S Request For A Ruling On Jurisdiction Under Article 19(3) Of The Statute”, Fannie Lafontaine, Robert Currie, Amanda Ghahremani

Reports & Public Policy Documents

The Amici Curiae (‘the Amici’) have been granted leave by Pre-Trial Chamber I (‘the Chamber’) to submit observations in the present proceeding, which derives from the Prosecutor’s request under art. 19(3) for a ruling on whether the Court may exercise jurisdiction over the alleged deportation of the Rohingya people from Myanmar to Bangladesh.

The Amici respectfully offer the Chamber observations on the novel legal issues raised by the Prosecutor’s Request: (II) the scope of art. 19(3) and the powers of the Prosecutor to seek a ruling on jurisdiction before a formal situation has been assigned to it; (III) the scope …

In The Case Of Lyle V. Warner Bros. Television Productions, Et Al.: A Brief Amicus Curiae, Russell K. Robinson

Russell K Robinson

No abstract provided.

Introductory Note To Brief Of Amicus Curiae In Ebay V. Mercexchange, Robert P. Merges

Robert P Merges

No abstract provided.

When The Court Has A Party, How Many Friends Show Up - A Note On The Statistical Distribution Of Amicus Brief Filings, Daniel A. Farber

Daniel A Farber

This article examines the statistical distribution of amicus brief filings. The previous research on the distribution of amicus brief filings had examined the patterns of citation frequency in order to test three models. The current study tests these models in the context of amicus brief filings. The two primary results of the current study are presented. First, a power law distribution does provide improved fit over linear regression. Second, amicus brief filings are unrelated to the number of federal appellate citations received by an opinion.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Economists In Support Of Petitioners, Bell Atlantic V. Twombly, Vernon L. Smith, William J. Baumol, Michael J. Boskin, Robert W. Crandall, Kenneth G. Elzinga, David S. Evans, Gerald R. Faulhaber, Franklin M. Fisher, Luke Froeb, Richard J. Gilbert, Paul L. Joskow, Michael L. Katz, Paul R. Milgrom, Thomas G. Moore, Janusz A. Ordover, Robert H. Porter, Frederic M. Scherer, Richard Schmalensee, Marius Schwartz, David S. Sibley, Edward A. Snyder, A. Michael Spence, Pablo T. Spiller, Alan O. Sykes, David Teece, Michael D. Whinston

Richard Gilbert

The "parallel behavior is enough" standard cannot assist the courts in distinguishing horizontal agreements to restrain trade from normal competition. It would very likely impose significant costs on the economy by distorting competitive incentives and encouraging meritless litigation designed mainly to induce financial settlements.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Economists In Support Of Petitioners, Bell Atlantic V. Twombly, Vernon L. Smith, William J. Baumol, Michael J. Boskin, Robert W. Crandall, Kenneth G. Elzinga, David S. Evans, Gerald R. Faulhaber, Franklin M. Fisher, Luke Froeb, Richard J. Gilbert, Paul L. Joskow, Michael L. Katz, Paul R. Milgrom, Thomas G. Moore, Janusz A. Ordover, Robert H. Porter, Frederic M. Scherer, Richard Schmalensee, Marius Schwartz, David S. Sibley, Edward A. Snyder, A. Michael Spence, Pablo T. Spiller, Alan O. Sykes, David Teece, Michael D. Whinston

Vernon L. Smith

The "parallel behavior is enough" standard cannot assist the courts in distinguishing horizontal agreements to restrain trade from normal competition. It would very likely impose significant costs on the economy by distorting competitive incentives and encouraging meritless litigation designed mainly to induce financial settlements.