Law Commons^™

A Public Calling: Lessons From The Lives Of Judges Of Color In Pennsylvania, Phoebe A. Haddon

Phoebe A. Haddon

This paper discusses how Judge Clifford Scott Green, Judge William Marutani, and Judge Juanita Kidd Stout spent their lives as leaders in the law to illustrate the ideal of a "public calling."

The Better Part Of Valor: The Real Id Act, Discretion, And The “Rule” Of Immigration Law, Daniel Kanstroom

Daniel Kanstroom

This article considers the problems raised by a federal law--the “REAL ID Act”--that seeks to preclude judicial review of discretionary immigration law decisions. Discretion, the flexible shock absorber of the administrative state, must be respected by our legal system. However, as Justice Felix Frankfurter once wrote, discretion is, “only to be respected when it is conscious of the traditions which surround it and of the limits which an informed conscience sets to its exercise.” The article suggests that judicial construction of the REAL ID Act will plumb the deep meaning of this qualification. The new law states, essentially, that constitutional …

Judging Genes: Implications Of The Second Generation Of Genetic Tests In The Courtroom, Diane E. Hoffmann, Karen H. Rothenberg

Diane Hoffmann

The use of DNA tests for identification has revolutionized court proceedings in criminal and paternity cases. Now, requests by litigants to admit or compel a second generation of genetic tests – tests to confirm or predict genetic diseases and conditions – threaten to affect judicial decision-making in many more contexts. Unlike DNA tests for identification, these second generation tests may provide highly personal health and behavioral information about individuals and their relatives and will pose new challenges for trial court judges. This article reports on an original empirical study of how judges analyze these requests and uses the study results …

Dora And William Donner Were Busy People, Richard H. Maloy

Richard Maloy

No abstract provided.

Civil Protective Orders In Integrated Domestic Violence Court: An Empirical Study, Erika Rickard

Erika Rickard

New York's Integrated Domestic Violence (IDV) Court was created to streamline the judicial process and promote efficiency and victim safety in cases of domestic violence. One would expect this collaboration and concerted effort on improving the justice system for victims of domestic violence would yield faster results than under the traditional system. The data presented here indicate just the opposite: IDV Courts take longer to address motions for civil protective orders, and are not significantly more likely to grant such orders than traditional matrimonial courts. Delays in the civil protective order process suggest that the problem-solving court may not be …

Checking The Staats: How Long Is Too Long To Give Adequate Public Notice In Broadening Reissue Patent Applications?, David M. Longo

David M. Longo

No abstract provided.

The Reality Of Eu-Conformity Review In France, Juscelino F. Colares

Juscelino F. Colares

French High Courts embraced review of national legislation for conformity with EU law in different stages and following distinct approaches to EU law supremacy. This article tests whether adherence to different views on EU law supremacy has resulted in different levels of EU directive enforcement by the French High Courts. After introducing the complex French systems of statutory, treaty and constitutional review, this study explains how EU-conformity review emerged among these systems and provides an empirical analysis refuting the anecdotal view that different EU supremacy theories produce substantial differences in conformity adjudication outcomes. These Courts' uniformly high rates of EU …

Information Sharing In A Common Law Of Sentencing: A Skeptic's Guide, Ryan W. Scott

Ryan W. Scott

For decades, prominent scholars and judges have called for the development of a “common law of sentencing” in the United States. One strand of scholarship stresses the information sharing function of the common law: sentencing judges need access to a body of written opinions that reveals how other courts have handled similar cases. The idea is that, fueled by better information, case-by-case common law reasoning will promote inter-judge consistency and rationality in sentencing law. This Article takes a skeptical view, identifying three sets of challenges for an information-sharing approach. First, there are daunting information-collection challenges. A healthy common law depends …

Originalism And The Aristotelian Tradition: Virtue’S Home In Originalism, Lee Strang

Lee J Strang

A concept fundamental to philosophy—virtue—is, with a few notable exceptions, absent from scholarship on constitutional interpretation generally, and originalism in particular. Furthermore, common perceptions of both virtue ethics and originalism have prevented exploration of how incorporating virtue ethics’ insights may make originalism a better theory of constitutional interpretation. This Article fills that void by explaining the many ways in which concepts from virtue ethics are compatible with an originalist theory of constitutional interpretation. More importantly, I show that originalism is more normatively attractive and descriptively accurate when it takes on board virtue ethics’ insights.

Originalism must articulate virtue’s role in …

Does Three Do The Trick In The Ninth? The Liberal Ninth Circuit – Myth Or Fact: How The Three Judge Panel, And A System Of Published And Unpublished Opinions Interact With Political Appointments In The Ninth Circuit, Rachel N. Agress

Rachel N. Agress

This article examines the persistent view that the Ninth Circuit is “overly liberal,” and attempts to evaluate this outlook in light of data collected regarding two variables. The first variable is the composition of individual political orientations of judges on the Ninth Circuit as compared to the political composition of other circuit courts. To achieve this comparison, this paper looks at political appointments and classified judges as “liberal” or “conservative,” based on political appointment by a Democratic or Republican president. Further, this article delineates the current percentage of “liberal” versus “conservative” judges in each circuit, comparing the average circuit court …

A Farewell To Harms: Presuming Irreparable Injury In Constitutional Litigation, Anthony Disarro

Anthony DiSarro

Although it is an essential element to obtaining injunctive relief, most federal circuit courts have held that irreparable injury can be presumed in constitutional cases. The Supreme Court has not addressed a presumption of irreparable harm in the constitutional context but it has disapproved of the practice for federal statutory claims. This article argues that the presumption is improper. The history of the injunctive remedy in this country suggests that irreparable injury is an essential element of proof that should be applied in all cases. Indeed, although constitutional rights are of paramount importance in our legal system, the fact that …

Getting Away With Murder (Most Of The Time): A Sesquicentennial Analysis Of Civil War Era Homicide Cases In Boone County, Missouri, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Frank O. Bowman III

In the quarter century centered on the Civil War, 1850-1875, fifty-three homicide cases came before the courts of Boone County, Missouri, of which Columbia, home of the University of Missouri, is the county seat. To remarkable degree, the story of these killings, told in this article, is a chronicle of the place and period.

The article’s method might be described as “murder as social history.” Its narrative thread is an effort to explain the remarkable fact that only twelve of the fifty-three defendants charged with murder were ever convicted of any form of criminal homicide. The explanation requires an introduction …

The Reality Of Eu-Conformity Review In France, Juscelino F. Colares

Juscelino F. Colares

French High Courts embraced review of national legislation for conformity with EU law in different stages and following distinct approaches to EU law supremacy. This article tests whether adherence to different views on EU law supremacy has resulted in different levels of EU directive enforcement by the French High Courts. After introducing the complex French systems of statutory, treaty and constitutional review, this study explains how EU-conformity review emerged among these systems and provides an empirical analysis refuting the anecdotal view that different EU supremacy theories produce substantial differences in conformity adjudication outcomes. These Courts' uniformly high rates of EU …

Cognitive Illiberalism And Debiasing Strategies, Paul Secunda

Paul M. Secunda

Legal realist scholars of a generation ago posited that judicial perception of facts reflect previously-held values and assumptions rather than record evidence. Yet crucially those scholars did not describe the psychological mechanism by which judges’ values come to shape facts. Understanding the psychological mechanism, culturally-motivated cognition, is a necessary first step to counteract the impact of cognitive illiberalism. Cognitive illiberalism results from the manner in which legal decisionmakers explain their decisions, and how those explanations are processed by “losers” in the politico-legal wars of our society. The phenomenon of cognitive illiberalism delegitimizes legal decisions and causes societal discontent with the …

Jury Deliberations – How Do Reasoning Skills Interplay With Decision-Making?, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

We may well wonder how the Casey Anthony reached its verdict in spite of what many of us thought was a raft of compelling evidence. In order to understand some of the nuances at play, it is important to understand some of the issues that confront a jury and how the criminal justice system ensures or attempts to ensure a fair outcome in our trial by jury system

Judicial Misconduct In Criminal Cases: It’S Not Just The Counsel Who May Be Ineffective And Unprofessional, Richard Klein

Richard Daniel Klein

No abstract provided.

What’S More Important Than Wise Judges? Wise Voters, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Justice Holmes At The Intersection Of Philosophical And Legal Pragmatism, Seth C. Vannatta

Seth C Vannatta

Because of the prolific scholarship on legal theory by Judge Richard Posner, especially since his turn away from law and economics toward “pragmatism,” legal scholars began reading “legal pragmatism” as references to Posner’s thought alone. My present task is part of a larger process of rethinking Posner’s version of legal pragmatism. Posner’s inspiration for his turn toward pragmatism can be attributed, in large measure, to Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Posner buys into three central insights of legal pragmatism, whose origins lie in the work of Holmes, anti-formalism, the prediction theory of the law, and a modicum of indeterminacy in judicial …

Shirking The Duty To Defend In Florida: Is Assignment The Exception To Argonaut?, Matthew J. Jowanna

Matthew J. Jowanna

A lawsuit is filed by a plaintiff and the defendant is served. The defendant has a drawer full of liability insurance policies and, therefore, the insured defendant sends a copy of the served complaint to any and all insurance carriers that may provide coverage for the claim. The insured defendant then receives a few coverage denials for reasons such as the event at issue did not occur within a certain policy period or that the insured’s private automobile policy does not provide coverage for a commercial general liability claim. In any event, the denials appear to be valid - so …

All Your Eggs In One Basket: Why Contract Law Proves Unreliable In Frozen Embryo Adoption Cases, Austin R. Caster

Austin R Caster

This article will show why infertile couples cannot unequivocally rely on good faith, consensual contracts in cases of assisted reproductive technology because the law is so unsettled. Each section will show why, because of alleged public policy implications, contract doctrines or clauses such as (1) the termination of parental rights, (2) the doctrine of waste, and (3) liquidated damages still remain almost completely unreliable in a matter regarding assisted reproductive technology. Though this uncertainty affects infertile couples trying to complete their families through various methods including adoption, surrogacy, in vitro fertilization, and artificial insemination, this article will focus on cases …

The Niqab In The Courtroom: Protecting Free Exercise Of Religion In A Post-Smith World, Adam Schwartzbaum

Adam Schwartzbaum

The niqab has become enmeshed in heated political controversy all across the world. In the United States, the situation of Ginnah Muhammad exemplifies the complex legal issues arising from conflicts between individuals whose religious beliefs compel this practice and the secular state. Muhammad, an African-American Muslim woman, was ejected from a Michigan small claims court for refusing to remove her veil while testifying. This Comment explores the constitutionality of this action, and a subsequent amendment to the Michigan Rules of Evidence passed in response to her case giving judges the power to “exercise reasonable control over parties and witnesses." Inevitably, …

Processing Civil Rights Summary Judgment And Consumer Discrimination Claims, Deseriee A. Kennedy

Deseriee A. Kennedy

No abstract provided.

Seeing The Forest Through The Trees: Thinking Critically About Mental Health Courts, John A. Bozza

John A Bozza

The almost universal acceptance of the problem-solving court concept by both the courts and the academic community provides a good example of the hazards of the bandwagon effect on the de-velopment of public policy. The proponents of therapeutic juris-prudence have successfully promoted the adoption of these pro-grams by repeating and then having others repeat a mantra of success that grossly belies reality and ignores the compelling is-sues they raise. Not surprisingly, this has led to the develop-ment of an extensive bureaucracy fueled almost entirely by fed-eral money and encouraged by cheerleaders entrenched in the self-serving subculture of therapeutic jurisprudence. Unfortunately, …

Judging Indian Law: What Factors Influence Individual Justice’S Votes On Indian Law In The Modern Era, Grant Christensen

Grant Christensen

Abstract: Scholars of the Supreme Court often use a justice’s political ideology to predict their ultimate vote on Constitutional questions. While this approach may serve scholars well when questions involve hot button civil liberties issues that are the focus of confirmation hearings, ideology is in actuality a poor predictor of judicial behavior in other areas of law. This paper looks at one of the more complex – Federal Indian Law – and uses both descriptive statistics and more advanced quantitative analysis to go beyond the pure ideology and explain why individual Justices vote the way they do. Using the Fisher …

Strengthening The Rule Of Virtue And Finding Chinese Law In "Other" Places: Gods, Kin, Guilds And Gifts, Mary Szto

Mary Szto

Discussions about the rule of law in China today often do not consider the role of virtue or ritual. At the same time, many bemoan slow or no legal reform. Before the tumultuous events of the 20th century, traditional Chinese law (TCL) was remarkably continuous and stable for centuries. It was a blend of ritual and law focused on flourishing and virtue formation. Ritual was communion with, and law accountability to, the invisible spirit world. This inseparable blend spanned multiple jurisdictions, from state codes and courts to divine petitions and courts, to ancestral rites and family codes, to merchant codes …

Excluding Exclusion: How Herring Jeopardizes The Fourth Amendment's Protections Against Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Hariqbal Basi

Hariqbal Basi

For nearly a half-century, the exclusionary rule has remained an important mechanism for ensuring police compliance with the Fourth Amendment and deterring unconstitutional searches and seizures. In January 2009, the Supreme Court held in Herring v. United States that the exclusionary rule does not apply to good faith negligent police behavior. This significantly broadened the law, and severely limits the future application of the exclusionary rule. Furthermore, this holding has strong potential for abuse by police departments. By analogizing to Fifth Amendment jurisprudence and Miranda rights, I argue that the ruling in Herring needs to be limited in order to …

Chooseyourjudges.Org: Treating Elected Judges As Politicians, Ric Simmons

Ric Simmons

The United States is the only country in the world that elects its judges, and popular support for judicial elections is so strong that we will certainly continue electing our judges for many years to come. However, even after centuries of conducting judicial elections, we have no clear answer to a basic question: what criteria are voters supposed use when they choose between competing judicial candidates? This article proposes a simple but controversial answer to that question: voters ought to evaluate judicial candidates based on the candidates' political ideology, and the only way to truly know the political ideology of …

Opening Pandora’S Box: An Empirical Exploration Of Judicial Settlement, Peter Robinson

Peter R. Robinson

The article is an empirical study of, among other things, what judges do when they are facilitating a settlement and they believe the outcome is substantially different from what they believe would be the usual range of outcomes at trial. The topic is important because many authors have expressed concern about the blurring of the judicial roles of settlement facilitator and decision maker. it documents that judges are largely unconcerned, which raises many policy questions.

Another piece of good news is that this is the fourth in a series of law review articles and is empirically based. A literature review …

Violent Video Games & "Constitutionalized" Negligence, Deana Ann Pollard Sacks

Deana A Pollard

Violent video games create serious risks of harm to children’s brain functioning, health, and safety. Extremely wealthy game producers’ demonstrated disregard for children’s safety raises questions about lower courts’ negligent speech liability rules that effectively bar tort liability for unreasonably dangerous speech, including violent video games. Violent Video Games & “Constitutionalized” Negligence reviews the latest scientific data on the effects of violent video games on children and challenges the prevailing negligent speech liability rules generally, and specifically relative to violent video game producers’ relationship with children. Most courts have adopted the Brandenburg incitement test to prove fault and causation in …

Toward Adequacy: Sense And Statutory Construction In The Judicial Review Provisions Of The Apa, Sarah L. Olson

Sarah L Olson

Each year, hundreds of people, companies, organizations, and associations sue the federal government for injuries they have suffered at the hands of federal agencies. Such suits are often brought under the judicial review provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), which Congress enacted expressly to allow broad access to courts in an age of increasing administrative agency action. By the terms of the APA itself, all final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court is reviewable under the APA.

But the very language meant to welcome such suits into court also acts as a …