Law Commons^™

The Emerging Neoliberal Penality: Rethinking Foucauldian Punishment In A Profit-Driven Carceral System, Kevin Crow

Kevin Crow

Discrimination In Customer Segmentation Marketing Practices, Jude A. Thomas

Jude A Thomas

Customer segmentation is a powerful analytical marketing practice that is employed by a wide range of businesses to segregate customers with similar characteristics into subgroups in order to inform operational business processes. Such practices allow firms to better allocate their resources in order to form more profitable customer relationships, but they also have the capacity to lead to unfair discriminatory impact upon customer groups. Current legislation is largely unprotective of customers so positioned, but recent trends in the insurance and lending industries suggest that a broader application of anti-discrimination laws could foretell a future of greater restrictions on the implementation …

Janus Capital Group, Inc. V. First Derivative Traders: The Culmination Of The Supreme Court’S Evolution From Liberal To Reactionary In Rule 10b-5 Actions, Charles W. Murdock

Charles W. Murdock

“Political” decisions such as Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business (“Obamacare”) reflect the reactionary bent of several Supreme Court justices. But this reactionary trend is discernible in other areas as well. With regard to Rule 10b-5, the Court has handed down a series of decisions that could be grouped into four trilogies. The article examines the trend over the past 40 years which has become increasingly conservative and finally reactionary.

The first trilogy was a liberal one, arguably overextending the scope of Rule 10b-5. This was followed by a conservative trilogy which put a brake on such extension, …

Janus Capital Group, Inc. V. First Derivative Traders: The Culmination Of The Supreme Court’S Evolution From Liberal To Reactionary In Rule 10b-5 Actions, Charles W. Murdock

Charles W. Murdock

“Political” decisions such as Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business (“Obamacare”) reflect the reactionary bent of several Supreme Court justices. But this reactionary trend is discernible in other areas as well. With regard to Rule 10b-5, the Court has handed down a series of decisions that could be grouped into four trilogies. The article examines the trend over the past 40 years which has become increasingly conservative and finally reactionary.

The first trilogy was a liberal one, arguably overextending the scope of Rule 10b-5. This was followed by a conservative trilogy which put a brake on such extension, …

Janus Capital Group, Inc. V. First Derivative Traders: The Culmination Of The Supreme Court’S Reactionary Rule 10b-5 Jurisprudence Which Protects Fraud At The Expense Of Investors, Charles W. Murdock

Charles W. Murdock

Summary: Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders: The Culmination of the Supreme Court’s Reactionary Rule 10b-5 Jurisprudence Which Protects Fraud at the Expense of Investors

“Political” decisions such as Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business (“Obamacare”) reflect the reactionary bent of several Supreme Court justices. But this reactionary trend is discernible in other areas as well. With regard to Rule 10b-5, the Court has handed down a series of decisions that could be grouped into four trilogies. The article examines the trend over the past 40 years which has become increasingly conservative and finally reactionary.

The …

Janus Capital Group, Inc. V. First Derivative Traders: The Culmination Of The Supreme Court’S Reactionary Rule 10b-5 Jurisprudence Which Protects Fraud At The Expense Of Investors, Charles W. Murdock

Charles W. Murdock

Summary: Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders: The Culmination of the Supreme Court’s Reactionary Rule 10b-5 Jurisprudence Which Protects Fraud at the Expense of Investors

“Political” decisions such as Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business (“Obamacare”) reflect the reactionary bent of several Supreme Court justices. But this reactionary trend is discernible in other areas as well. With regard to Rule 10b-5, the Court has handed down a series of decisions that could be grouped into four trilogies. The article examines the trend over the past 40 years which has become increasingly conservative and finally reactionary.

The …

Complexity Theory And The Horizontal And Vertical Dimensions Of State Responsibility, Mark A. Chinen

Mark A. Chinen

In this Article I argue along with other commentators that a gap that has always existed in the law of state responsibility is now becoming more evident, namely the one that exists between a state and its citizens, making it difficult to justify why state responsibility should be distributed to those citizens. If for example a state agrees at the international level to undertake domestic austerity measures, why should its citizens bear the costs of such measures, especially when the same state is obligated under international law to protect those citizens’ human rights?

I use concepts taken from complexity theory …

The Evolution Of The Supreme Court’S Rule 10b-5 Jurisprudence:, Charles W. Murdock

Charles W. Murdock

Summary: The Evolution of the Supreme Court’s Rule 10b-5 Jurisprudence:

Protecting Fraud at the Expense of Investors

This article traces the evolution of Supreme Court jurisprudence over the past forty years through the prism of Rule 10b-5. It uses four “trilogies” to develop this evolution. At the start of the 1970s, the liberal trend characterized by the Warren Court still prevailed. An implied private cause of action was still in favor and litigators were viewed as private attorneys general, enforcing the securities laws to further the policy of protecting investors.

The expansion of Rule 10b-5 was slowed and more judicial …

Tocqueville And The American Amalgam, Andrew C. Spiropoulos

Andrew C. Spiropoulos

Any serious attempt to understand the original meaning of the Constitution requires an inquiry into what was, if any, the dominant political theory that guided the founding of the American regime. Recent decades have witnessed a lively scholarly debate between the partisans of the liberal interpretation of the Founding, which posits that liberal political theory is the intellectual foundation of our regime, and those of classical republicanism. The classical republicans argue that the influence of liberal theory on the Founding has been exaggerated, and that the Founders cared more about securing the authority to govern their communities in the name …

Teacher’S Manual To Accompany Jurisprudence: Classical And Contemporary: From Natural Law To Postmodernism, Robert Hayman, Nancy Levit, Richard Delgado

Richard Delgado

No abstract provided.

Jurisprudence: Classical And Contemporary: From Natural Law To Postmodernism, Robert Hayman, Nancy Levit, Richard Delgado

Richard Delgado

No abstract provided.

How Do Roles Generate Reasons? On The Methods Of Legal Ethics, Stephen Galoob

Stephen Galoob

Debates about legal ethics should be oriented around the generative problem, which asks two fundamental questions. First, how does the lawyer’s role generate normatively compelling reasons for action? Second, what kinds of reasons can this role generate?

Every substantive theory of legal ethics is based on a solution to the generative problem. On the generative problem method, we should evaluate these theories based on their implicit solutions to the generative problem. None of the main theories of legal ethics is based on a solution to the generative problem that is both structurally valid and empirically verified.

The generative problem method …

The Hollow Promise Of Freedom Of Conscience, Nadia N. Sawicki

Nadia N. Sawicki

Two hundred years ago, Thomas Jefferson asserted that no law “ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority." Since then, freedom of conscience has continued to be heralded as a fundamental principle of American society. Indeed, many current policy debates – most notably in the medical and military contexts – are predicated on the theory that claims of conscience are worthy of legal respect. This Article challenges established assumptions, concluding that claims about the importance of conscience in American society have been highly exaggerated.

This Article first …

Unclear And Unconvincing: The Truthiness Requirement Of California's Ballot Pamphlet Arguments, Michael Boardman

Michael Boardman

“Truthiness,” as defined by TV satirist Steven Colbert, has found its way into the English lexicon. Unfortunately for California, its principles have also been incorporated into the state’s official ballot pamphlet. Misleading, and often demonstrably false, arguments written by special interests distort the political process yet the state continues to publish and distribute them to voters with little judicial recourse. Admirably, California permits private causes of action challenging the accuracy of these arguments, but the statutory scheme it has created to govern the challenges largely fails to promote its main goal: providing a central and convenient place for voters to …

The Rise Of The Common Law Of Federal Pleading: Iqbal, Twombly And The Application Of Judicial Experience, Henry S. Noyes

Henry S. Noyes

With its decisions in Twombly and Iqbal, the Supreme Court established a new federal pleading standard: a complaint must state a plausible claim for relief. Many commentators have written about the meaning of plausibility. None has focused on the Court’s statement that “[d]etermining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief...will be a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense.” In this article, I make and support several claims about the meaning and application of judicial experience. First, in order to understand and define the plausibility standard, one must understand …

The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

Steven J. Heyman

Modern First Amendment jurisprudence is deeply paradoxical. On one hand, freedom of speech is said to promote fundamental values such as individual self-fulfillment, democratic deliberation, and the search for truth. At the same time, however, many leading decisions protect speech that appears to undermine these values by attacking the dignity and personality of others or their status as full and equal members of the community. In this Article, I explore where this Jekyll-and-Hyde quality of First Amendment jurisprudence comes from. I argue that the American free speech tradition consists of two very different strands: a liberal humanist view that emphasizes …

The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

Steven J. Heyman

Modern First Amendment jurisprudence is deeply paradoxical. On one hand, freedom of speech is said to promote fundamental values such as individual self-fulfillment, democratic deliberation, and the search for truth. At the same time, however, many leading decisions protect speech that appears to injure these values by attacking the dignity and personality of others or their status as full and equal members of the community. In this Article, I explore where the Jekyll-and-Hyde quality of First Amendment jurisprudence comes from. I argue that the American free speech tradition actually consists of two very different strands: a liberal humanist view that …

The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

Steven J. Heyman

Modern First Amendment jurisprudence is deeply paradoxical in nature. On one hand, freedom of speech is said to promote fundamental values such as individual self-fulfillment, democratic deliberation, and the search for truth. At the same time, however, many decisions protect speech that appears to harm these values by attacking the dignity and personality of other people or their status as full and equal members of the community. In this Article, I explore where this Jekyll-and-Hyde quality comes from. I argue that the American free speech tradition actually consists of two very different strands: a liberal humanist view that emphasizes the …

Memory And Punishment, Orlando Carter Snead

O. Carter Snead

This article is the first scholarly exploration of the implications of neurobiological memory modification for criminal law. Its point of entry is the fertile context of criminal punishment, in which memory plays a crucial role. Specifically, this article will argue that there is a deep relationship between memory and the foundational principles justifying how punishment should be distributed, including retributive justice, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, moral education, and restorative justice. For all such theoretical justifications, the questions of who and how much to punish is inextricably intertwined with how a crime is remembered — by the offender, by the sentencing authority, …

Reaction Or Reformation?: Leo Strauss And American Constitutional Law, Andrew C. Spiropoulos

Andrew C. Spiropoulos

This article explains the importance of the work of the political theorist Leo Strauss to the study of American constitutional law. The foundation of Strauss's work was his belief that the civilization of the West faces a profound crisis. This crisis, he argued, was a crisis of modernity, by which he meant modern political philosophy. The nature of this crisis is the West's loss of faith in reason, the cornerstone of its way of life. This loss of faith threatens the intellectual, spiritual, and even physical health of the West. Strauss argued that this crisis came about because of the …

Reaction Or Reformation?: Leo Strauss And American Constitutional Law, Andrew C. Spiropoulos

Andrew C. Spiropoulos

This article explains the importance of the work of the political theorist Leo Strauss to the study of American constitutional law. The foundation of Strauss's work was his belief that the civilization of the West faces a profound crisis. This crisis, he argued, was a crisis of modernity, by which he meant modern political philosophy. The nature of this crisis is the West's loss of faith in reason, the cornerstone of its way of life. This loss of faith threatens the intellectual, spiritual, and even physical health of the West. Strauss argued that this crisis came about because of the …

Bloomin' Buzzin' Confusion: Facts And Meaning In Adjudication And Mediation, Robert Rubinson

Robert Rubinson

Bloomin’ Buzzin’ Confusion: Facts and Meaning In Adjudication and Mediation ABSTRACT Any methodology, model, or cognitive process must exclude more than it includes in order to make sense of experience. To do otherwise would leave only, in the words of William James, a “bloomin’ buzzin’ confusion.” Mediation and adjudication go about the process of developing meaning from circumstance in fundamentally different ways. Rather than focusing on what each process identifies as important, the article takes the opposite perspective and focuses on what each process excludes. In doing so, the article explores how adjudication identifies relevant “facts” through a specific mechanism: …

Bloomin' Buzzin' Confusion: Facts And Meaning In Adjudication And Mediation, Robert Rubinson

Robert Rubinson

Any methodology, model or cognitive process must exclude more than it includes in order to make sense of experience. To do otherwise would leave only, in the words of Williams James, a "bloomin' buzzin' confusion." Mediation and adjudication go about the process of developing meaning from circumstance in fundamentally different ways. Rather than focusing on what each process identifies as important, the article takes the opposite perspective and focuses on what each process excludes. In doing so, the article explores how adjudication identifies relevant "facts" through a specific mechanism: preexisting substantive rules define what matters and procedural rules exclude what …

Erie's Suppressed Premise, Michael S. Green

Michael S. Green

The Erie doctrine is usually understood as a limitation on federal courts’ power. This Article concerns the unexplored role that the Erie doctrine has in limiting the power of state courts. According to Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, a federal court must follow state supreme court decisions when interpreting state law. But at the time that Erie was decided, some state supreme courts were still committed to Swift v. Tyson. They considered the content of their common law to be a factual matter, concerning which federal (and sister state) courts could make an independent judgment. Indeed, the Georgia Supreme Court still …

Memory And Punishment, Orlando Carter Snead

O. Carter Snead

This article is the first scholarly exploration of the implications of neurobiological memory modification for criminal law. Its point of entry is the fertile context of criminal punishment, in which memory plays a crucial role. Specifically, this article will argue that there is a deep relationship between memory and the foundational principles justifying how punishment should be distributed, including retributive justice, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, moral education, and restorative justice. For all such theoretical justifications, the questions of who and how much to punish are inextricably intertwined with how a crime is remembered — by the offender, by the sentencing authority, …

Science, Public Bioethics, And The Problem Of Integration, Orlando Carter Snead

O. Carter Snead

Public bioethics — the governance of science, medicine, and biotechnology in the name of ethical goods — is an emerging area of American law. The field uniquely combines scientific knowledge, moral reasoning, and prudential judgments about democratic decisionmaking. It has captured the attention of officials in every branch of government, as well as the American public. Public questions (such as those relating to the law of abortion, the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, and the regulation of end-of-life decisionmaking) continue to roil the public square.

This article examines the question of how scientific methods and principles can and …

Book Review: The Iraq War And International Law, Maxwell O. Chibundu

Maxwell O. Chibundu

A review of The Iraq War and International Law edited by Phil Shiner and Andrew Williams. Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2008.

What Is Due To Others: Speaking And Signifying Subject(S) Of Rape Law, Penelope Pether

Penelope J Pether

Australian journalist Paul Sheehan's representation of the alleged and convicted immigrant Muslim/Arab rapists he demonises in Girls Like You, like his representation of the rape survivors in that text, has much to tell us about the law's production of rape law's speaking and signifying subjects, "real rape" victims and survivors, false accusers and perpetrators. This article uses a variety of texts, including Girls Like You, recent Australian rape law jurisprudence and legislative reform, texts involving two controversial recent US rape cases — one from Maryland and one from Nebraska — and a recent UK study on attrition in rape prosecutions, …

Haunted By Brown, Robert Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

No abstract provided.

The Death Of The American Trial, Robert Burns

Robert P. Burns

This book analyzes and criticizes the loss of one of the great achievements of our public culture, the American trial.