Law Commons^™

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Incommensurability, Practices And Points Of View: Revitalizing H.La. Hart’S Practice Theory Of Rules, Eric J. Miller

Eric J. Miller

The standard reading of H.L.A. Hart’s practice theory of rules is that it failed to provide a sufficient normative basis for a theory of law. That standard reading rests upon a significant misunderstanding: that Hart has an exclusionary reason approach to law. Instead, Hart understands law to be a social practice, one capable of generating valid norms that not only block the operation of moral norms, but which are wholesale incommensurable with them.

Wholesale incommensurability entails that law, as a form of social practice, constitutes a discrete normative system in which the truth-conditions of legal propositions are distinct from the …

The Invisible Man: How The Sex Offender Registry Results In Social Death, Elizabeth B. Megale

Elizabeth B. Megale

This Article establishes that overcriminalization serves to marginalize unwanted groups of society, and particularly regarding the sex offender registry, it results in social death. The author relies upon the notion of crime as a social construct to establish that the concept of “sex offense” changes over time as society and culture evolve. From there, the author incorporates the work of Michele Foucault involving the relationship of power, knowledge, and sexuality to show how the trend toward more repressive social controls over sex-related activity is related to a shift in this relationship. The Author identifies three characteristics and the associated traits …

Freezing Assets In The War On Terror: Ofac And The Fourth Amendment, Rebecca Kagan Sternhell

Rebecca Kagan Sternhell

In 2001, President Bush issued Executive Order 13224 declaring a state of national emergency and triggering an array of emergency powers. Chief among these powers was the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”), which permits the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”) to freeze the assets and accounts of suspected terrorists and their affiliates. Recently OFAC has gone after U.S. charities. Three US charities filed suit alleging Fourth Amendment violations. Each organization received a different judicial determination on the Fourth Amendment question. The paper discusses these three cases and demonstrates no consensus on the Fourth Amendment issue. There …

Why The Demands Of Formalism Will Prevent New Originalism From Furthering Conservative Political Goals, Daniel James Hornal

Daniel Hornal

Proponents of New Originalism propose that their modifications solve the indeterminacy and predictability problems inherent in early conceptions of originalism. This paper argues that excluding extrinsic evidence and relying only on the formal implications of the text merely switches one indeterminacy and predictability problem for another. Rules inherently carry implications unknown to rule writers. In the case of open-textured rules such as those in the Constitution, a broad reading can occupy whole fields of law, whereas a narrow reading can have almost no real-world effects. Because they must ignore extrinsic evidence, new originalists are almost unbound in their choice of …

The Distorted Reality Of Civil Recourse Theory, Alan Calnan

Alan Calnan

In their recent article Torts as Wrongs, Professors John C.P. Goldberg and Benjamin C. Zipursky offer their most complete and accessible explanation of the civil recourse theory (CRT) of tort law. A purely descriptive account, CRT holds that tort law is exclusively a scheme of private rights for the redress of legal wrongs and is not a pragmatic mechanism for imposing strict liability or implementing public policy. The present paper challenges this view by revealing critical errors in its perspective, methodology, and analysis. It shows that Goldberg and Zipursky do not objectively observe tort law and uncritically report what they …

Results-Oriented Jurisprudence: A Second Circuit Panel Meets J. D. Salinger Coming Through The Rye, Kathleen (Kate) M. O'Neill

Kathleen M. O'Neill

ABSTRACT The Second Circuit’s 2010 decision in Salinger v. Colting has been widely noticed for vacating a preliminary injunction J. D. Salinger obtained against distribution in the U.S. of Fredrik Colting’s novel, 60 YEARS LATER – COMING THROUGH THE RYE. In an opinion by Judge Guido Calabresi, the panel adopted the standard for equitable relief from eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange (U.S. 2006), overruled circuit precedent, and held that henceforth district courts must find, not presume, that irreparable harm is in fact likely before enjoining a copyright defendant’s activities. This is the first article to observe that what the Second Circuit …

Safeguarding The Safeguards: The Extension Of Structural Protection To Non-Fundamental Liberties, Abigail R. Moncrieff

Abigail R. Moncrieff

As the lawsuits challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) have evolved, one feature of the litigation has proven especially rankling to the legal academy: the incorporation of substantive libertarian concerns into the structural federalism analysis. The breadth and depth of scholarly criticism is surprising, however, given that judges frequently choose indirect methods, including structural and process-based methods of the kinds at issue in the ACA litigation, for protecting substantive constitutional values. Indeed, indirection in the protection of constitutional liberties is a well-known and well-theorized strategy, which one scholar recently termed “semisubstantive review” and another recently theorized as …

(Dis)Owning Religious Speech, Jessie Hill

Jessie Hill

To claims of a right to equal citizenship, one of the primary responses has long been to assert the right of private property. It is therefore somewhat troubling that, in two recent cases involving public displays of religious symbolism, the Supreme Court embraced property law and rhetoric when faced with the claims of minority religious speakers for inclusion and equality. The first, Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, is a free speech case in which the defendant evaded a finding that it was discriminating against the plaintiff’s religious speech by claiming a government speech defense. In the process, it claimed as …

Safeguarding The Safeguards: The Aca Litigation And The Extension Of Structural Protection To Non-Fundamental Liberties, Abigail R. Moncrieff

Abigail R. Moncrieff

This article confronts and challenges an emerging scholarly consensus that criticizes the hybridization of substantive and structural arguments in the litigation over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). Although there is no doubt that the ACA plaintiffs have requested and the ACA judges have provided a hybrid substantive-structural holding, there is nothing at all unusual about this indirect strategy for protecting constitutional liberty interests; it is a well-known and well-theorized strategy, which one scholar recently termed “semisubstantive review.” The article considers three possible distinctions between the ACA case and the ordinary case of semisubstantive review, and concludes that …

., V V

Vinicius Pintas Marinho

.

The Second-Class Class Action: How Courts Thwart Wage Rights By Misapplying Class Action Rules, Scott A. Moss, Nantiya Ruan

Scott A Moss

Courts apply to wage rights cases an aggressive scrutiny that not only disadvantages low-wage workers, but is fundamentally incorrect on the law. Rule 23 class actions automatically cover all potential members if the court grants plaintiffs’ class certification motion. But for certain employment rights cases – mainly wage claims but also age discrimination and gender equal pay claims – 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) allows not class actions but “collective actions” covering just those opting in affirmatively. Courts in collective actions assume a gatekeeper role as they do in Rule 23 class action, disallowing many actions by requiring a certification motion …

It Ain’T Necessarily So: The Misuse Of “Human Nature” In Law And Social Policy And The Bankruptcy Of The “Nature-Nuture” Debate, Justin Schwartz

Justin Schwartz

Debate about legal and policy reform has been haunted by a pernicious confusion about human nature, the idea that it is a set of rigid dispositions, today generally conceived as genetic, that is manifested the same way in all circumstances. Opponents of egalitarian alternatives argue that we cannot depart far from the status quo because human nature stands in the way. Advocates of such reforms too often deny the existence of human nature because, sharing this conception, they think it would prevent changes they deem desirable. Both views rest on deep errors about what it is to have a nature …

Come A Little Closer So That I Can See You My Pretty: The Use And Limits Of Fiction Point Of View Techniques In Appellate Briefs, Cathren Page

Cathren Page

Come a Little Closer so That I Can See You my Pretty, The Use and Limits of Fiction Point of Techniques in Appellate Briefs began when I was struggling to explain point of view to my students in Appellate Advocacy. They represented a fictional criminal defendant whose bag was searched when the police were executing a premises warrant at his friend’s house. My students scrunched up their faces when I tried to explain why they should not start their facts with the friend’s crime that spurred the search. The crime happened first in time, so to them it came first. …

Towards A Synthesis Between Islamic And Western Jus In Bello, Jacob Turner

Jacob Turner

In the body of international humanitarian law (‘IHL’), there is a lacuna regarding the status of combatants engaged in asymmetric warfare. This has arisen, at least in part, out of a failure to establish a satisfactory distinction between civilians and combatants reflecting the nature of such conflicts and commanding the respect of parties to them. The recent killing of Osama Bin Laden by US Special Forces Operatives has provided publicity to the debates regarding the legal status of irregular combatants. Some have claimed that Bin Laden ought to have been captured alive and tried in a court. The US administration …

Demystifying The Determination Of Foreign Law In U.S. Courts: Opening The Door To A Greater Global Understanding, Matthew J. Wilson

Matthew J. Wilson

With globalization and the proliferation of international commercial interaction, U.S. courts commonly encounter issues governed by the laws of other sovereigns. These encounters arise by virtue of private agreements or choice-of-law rules covering contractual relationships, cross-border conduct, tortuous acts, employment matters, intellectual property rights, and various other legal foundations. Because the substantive law applied in an international lawsuit can be outcome-determinative, it is important to accurately ascertain and determine the relevant law. In fact, the proper functioning of private international law in a domestic system is based on the appropriate application of law.

U.S. federal and state courts are presumed …

Dr. King’S Speech: Surveying The Landscape Of Law And Justice In The Speeches, Sermons, And Writings Of Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, Carlton Waterhouse

Carlton Waterhouse

ABSTRACT The belief that an essential relationship exists between law and justice has been recognized since the time of the ancient Greeks. In fact, the concept extends well beyond Western philosophy and jurisprudence. Distinct from other aspects of justice, the relationship between law and justice considers the nature of law and its dictates as well as the responsibility of citizens to obey it. Although Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. lacked the developed legal analysis of jurisprudence scholars, he made a meaningful contribution to the intellectual discourse of his time by forcing the discussion on the broader society and centering it …

Fantasyscotus: Crowdsourcing A Prediction Market For The Supreme Court, Josh Blackman, Adam Aft, Corey Carpenter

Josh Blackman

Every year the Supreme Court of the United States captivates the minds and curiosity of millions of Americans - yet the inner-workings of the Court are not fully transparent. The Court, without explanation, only decides the cases it wishes. They deliberate and assign authorship in private. The Justices hear oral arguments, and without notice, issue an opinion months later. They sometimes offer enigmatic clues during oral arguments through their questions. Between arguments and the day the Court issues an opinion, the outcome of a case is essentially a mystery. Sometimes the outcome falls along predictable lines; other times the outcome …

Rules, Standards, And The Attorney-Client Privilege: When Is The Privilege At-Issue In The Discovery Rule And Other Contexts?, Kenneth J. Duvall

Kenneth J Duvall

Striking the right balance between a robust attorney-client privilege and a judicial system that maximizes access to the best evidence has always been difficult. In recent decades, the privilege battles have in large part been waged over one particular exception to the privilege: the “at-issue” carve-out. Under this exception, the holders of the privilege waive it when they place otherwise privileged communications at issue in the litigation not through outright consent but instead through their conduct. The troubling question has therefore been: what actions suffice to place communications at issue? Privilege defenders consider confidential communications to be at issue only …

Risk In Sentencing: Constitutionally-Suspect Variables And Evidence-Based Sentencing, James C. Oleson

James C Oleson

It is said that imposing punishment is one of the most difficult things a judge will ever do. Implicit in the imposition of punishment are a number of competing philosophical considerations: retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilitation, among others. In many jurisdictions, judges enjoy broad authority over sentencing decisions; in others, judicial discretion is limited by mandatory-minimum penalties or sentencing guidelines. A new, actuarial approach to sentencing (“evidence-based sentencing”) focuses upon the reduction of recidivism, using data to maximize the utilitarian ends of sentencing. Research suggests that statistical assessments outperform clinical judgment of even trained experts. But which variables should judges …

No More Free Easements: Judicial Takings For Private Necessity, John Martinez

John Martinez

In Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection, 130 S.Ct. 2592 (2010), the United States Supreme Court was one vote short of recognizing "judicial takings" as viable federal constitutional claims. If such claims become available, then we must identify with precision those circumstances in which judicial takings claims should apply. The full panoply of remedies--forced condemnation, injunction, and interim damages--must be considered. This article begins the discussion with what perhaps are the easy cases, in which governmental judicial conduct imposes a permanent physical occupation on private land based solely on the private necessity of the benefitted …