Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bucklew V. Precythe'S Return To The Original Meaning Of "Unusual": Prohibiting Extensive Delays On Death Row, Jacob Leon
Bucklew V. Precythe'S Return To The Original Meaning Of "Unusual": Prohibiting Extensive Delays On Death Row, Jacob Leon
Cleveland State Law Review
The Supreme Court, in Bucklew v. Precythe, provided an originalist interpretation of the term “unusual” in the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This originalist interpretation asserted that the word “unusual” proscribes punishments that have “long fallen out of use.” To support its interpretation, the Supreme Court cited John Stinneford’s well-known law review article The Original Meaning of “Unusual”: The Eighth Amendment as a Bar to Cruel Innovation. This Article, as Bucklew did, accepts Stinneford’s interpretation of the word “unusual” as correct. Under Stinneford’s interpretation, the term “unusual” is a legal term of art derived from eighteenth-century …
Decoding Judicial Reasoning In China: A Comparative Empirical Analysis Of Guiding Cases, Runhua Wang
Decoding Judicial Reasoning In China: A Comparative Empirical Analysis Of Guiding Cases, Runhua Wang
Cleveland State Law Review
The judicial system in China recently started using legal precedents—known as guiding cases—as a new legal source to eliminate adjudicative inconsistency. Guiding cases (“GCs”) present the current judicial reasoning to some extent and can be used to predict the future of judicial reasoning in China. What are GCs? What legal issues do GCs address? How do they address legal issues? How do GCs affect the legal system and adjudication in China? This Article answers these questions with empirical evidence and comparisons to judicial reasoning in the United States. It is the first empirical research providing a systematic review of all …
The Nfl Player, The Schoolchild, And The Entertainer: When The Term "Free Speech" Is Too Freely Spoken, Exactly "Who's On First?", Christian Ketter
The Nfl Player, The Schoolchild, And The Entertainer: When The Term "Free Speech" Is Too Freely Spoken, Exactly "Who's On First?", Christian Ketter
Cleveland State Law Review
As America’s media and politicians continue to debate the free speech rights of NFL players, schoolchildren, and entertainers, the dialogue has confused many Americans as to what exactly the First Amendment protects. Chief Justice John G. Roberts ultimately assumes the role of an umpire in many of these issues, guiding the United States Supreme Court to incrementally “call balls and strikes.” In recent years, the Court has umpired employment rights and state action cases, and Roberts’s calls will likely further distance the Court that decided Morse v. Frederick from the one that decided Tinker v. Des Moines. Amid a …
On Empathy In Judgment (Measure For Measure), Kenji Yoshino
On Empathy In Judgment (Measure For Measure), Kenji Yoshino
Cleveland State Law Review
This article is based on a Baker-Hostetler presentation given by the author at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. The author compares the nomination process of Supreme Court justices and the conflict between empathy and rule of law with William Shakespeare's Measure for Measure.
The Rehnquist Court, Strict Statutory Construction And The Bankruptcy Code, Carlos J. Cuevas
The Rehnquist Court, Strict Statutory Construction And The Bankruptcy Code, Carlos J. Cuevas
Cleveland State Law Review
This article analyzes the Rehnquist Court's use of strict statutory construction. It will argue that strict statutory construction can be justified under public choice and agency theories of statutory interpretation, and that strict construction promotes the implementation of bankruptcy policy. Strict statutory construction, moreover, is beneficial because it produces reliability and predictability, which is essential to our dynamic economy. The use of strict statutory construction precludes a court from relying on legislative history to manufacture the result that the court thinks is the best solution to the problem. Another justification for strict statutory construction is that it prevents bankruptcy judges …
Summary Judgment And Problems In Applying The Celotex Trilogy Standard, Gregory A. Gordillo
Summary Judgment And Problems In Applying The Celotex Trilogy Standard, Gregory A. Gordillo
Cleveland State Law Review
In this Note, the difficulties judges encounter in applying the Celotex standards are illustrated through an examination of summary judgment decisions in the United States Supreme Court and in Ohio courts. Ohio's judges often look to the Supreme Court's interpretations of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for guidance in applying Ohio's summary judgment rule, and summary judgment decisions of this state therefore exemplify the pitfalls that the Supreme Court has created.