Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Baseline data (1)
- Budgetary procedure (1)
- Class Action Fairness Act (1)
- Class action (1)
- Filibuster (1)
-
- Government researchers (1)
- Heuristics (1)
- Institutional incentives (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Lower court (1)
- Minoritarian tactics (1)
- Patricia W. Moore (1)
- Plaintiff (1)
- Private academic researchers (1)
- Reconciliation (1)
- Reversal (1)
- Senate (1)
- St. Mary’s University School of Law (1)
- Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles (1)
- State court class action abuses (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Filibuster And Reconciliation: The Future Of Majoritarian Lawmaking In The U.S. Senate, Tonja Jacobi, Jeff Vandam
The Filibuster And Reconciliation: The Future Of Majoritarian Lawmaking In The U.S. Senate, Tonja Jacobi, Jeff Vandam
Faculty Articles
Passing legislation in the United States Senate has become a de facto super-majoritarian undertaking, due to the gradual institutionalization of the filibuster — the practice of unending debate in the Senate. The filibuster is responsible for stymieing many legislative policies, and was the cause of decades of delay in the development of civil rights protection. Attempts at reforming the filibuster have only exacerbated the problem. However, reconciliation, a once obscure budgetary procedure, has created a mechanism of avoiding filibusters. Consequently, reconciliation is one of the primary means by which significant controversial legislation has been passed in recent years — including …
Confronting The Myth Of State Court Class Action Abuses Through An Understanding Of Heuristics And A Plea For More Statistics, Patricia W. Moore
Confronting The Myth Of State Court Class Action Abuses Through An Understanding Of Heuristics And A Plea For More Statistics, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
The Supreme Court heard six cases involving class actions this term. One of these cases, Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles, brought the Class Action Fairness Act to the Court for the first time. Petitioner insurance company and its numerous business-interest amici repeatedly claimed before the Court that "state court class action abuses" justified removal of the case (which was based on state law and filed in state court) to federal court.
The charge of a "flood" of "abusive state court class actions" echoed the same rhetoric that CAFA's supporters used a decade ago in their ultimately successful efforts to …