Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
Army Commander’S Role—The Judge, Jury, & Prosecutor For The Article 15, Anthony Godwin
Army Commander’S Role—The Judge, Jury, & Prosecutor For The Article 15, Anthony Godwin
Seattle University Law Review
Service members in the armed forces are bound by a different set of rules when compared to other U.S. citizens. Some of the normal safeguards and protections that civilians enjoy are much more restrictive for military service members, and this is generally for a good reason. Such restrictions are partly due to the complex demands and needs of the United States military. Congress and the President have entrusted military commanders with special powers that enable them to handle minor violations of law without needing to go through a full judicial proceeding. Non-judicial punishments (NJP), also known as Article 15s, are …
Textualism Today: Scalia’S Legacy And His Lasting Philosophy, Chase Wathen
Textualism Today: Scalia’S Legacy And His Lasting Philosophy, Chase Wathen
University of Miami Law Review
Appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986 by President Reagan, Justice Antonin Scalia redefined the philosophy of textualism. Although methods like the plain meaning rule had been around for over a century, the textualist philosophy of today was not mainstream. While Scalia’s textualism is thought to be a conservative philosophy, Scalia consistently maintained that it was judicial restraint rather than conservatism at the heart of his method. The key tenant of Scalia’s new textualism was an outright rejection of legislative history, which he often brought up in opinions only to mock and dismiss as irrelevant. Starting with the hypothesis that …
Judges Do It Better: Why Judges Can (And Should) Decide Life Or Death, Andrew R. Ford
Judges Do It Better: Why Judges Can (And Should) Decide Life Or Death, Andrew R. Ford
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
Following its decision in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court of the United States has attempted to standardize procedures that states use to subject offenders to the ultimate penalty. In practice, this attempt at standardization has divided capital sentencing into two distinct parts: the death eligibility decision and the death selection decision. The eligibility decision addresses whether the sentencer may impose the death penalty, while the selection decision determines who among that limited subset of eligible offenders is sentenced to death. In Ring v. Arizona, the Court held for the first time that the Sixth Amendment right to …
Is This Appropriate?, Thomas L. Shaffer, Julia B. Meister
Is This Appropriate?, Thomas L. Shaffer, Julia B. Meister
Thomas L. Shaffer
No abstract provided.
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Fred Brewington
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Fred Brewington
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Qualified Immunity When Facts Are In Dispute, Leon Friedman
Qualified Immunity When Facts Are In Dispute, Leon Friedman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Plain Talk About Plea Bargaining, Harry A. Ackley
Plain Talk About Plea Bargaining, Harry A. Ackley
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Toward A Balanced Approach To "Frivolous" Litigation: A Critical Review Of Federal Rule 11 And State Sanctions Provisions , Byron C. Keeling
Toward A Balanced Approach To "Frivolous" Litigation: A Critical Review Of Federal Rule 11 And State Sanctions Provisions , Byron C. Keeling
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Can Our Current Conception Of Copyright Law Survive The Internet Age?, Edward Samuels
Can Our Current Conception Of Copyright Law Survive The Internet Age?, Edward Samuels
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Trust Me, I’M A Judge: Why Binding Judicial Notice Of Jurisdictional Facts Violates The Right To Jury Trial, William M. Carter Jr.
Trust Me, I’M A Judge: Why Binding Judicial Notice Of Jurisdictional Facts Violates The Right To Jury Trial, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
The conventional model of criminal trials holds that the prosecution is required to prove every element of the offense beyond the jury's reasonable doubt. The American criminal justice system is premised on the right of the accused to have all facts relevant to his guilt or innocence decided by a jury of his peers. The role of the judge is seen as limited to deciding issues of law and facilitating the jury's fact-finding. Despite these principles,judges are reluctant to submit to the jury elements of the offense that the judge perceives to be . routine, uncontroversial or uncontested.
One such …
Supreme Court Federalism Decisions, Leon Friedman
Supreme Court Federalism Decisions, Leon Friedman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Is This Appropriate?, Thomas L. Shaffer, Julia B. Meister
Is This Appropriate?, Thomas L. Shaffer, Julia B. Meister
Journal Articles
The word "appropriate" is so wildly overused in American culture that, as with other vacuous words and phrases, a person learns to read right through it. "Appropriate" is verbal tofu. This Essay pauses instead of reading through, particularly to notice the instances in which "appropriate" and its negative counterpart are used to give the appearance of a moral or legal judgment.
"Appropriate," chosen to express a legal judgment, is not only vacuous; it is also irresponsible. It catches the legislator, judge, or administrator in the act of passing the buck, as the President did when he ordered the Justice Department …