Law Commons^™

The Unconstitutionality Of State Regulation Of Immigration Through Criminal Law, Gabriel J. Chin, Marc L. Miller

Duke Law Journal

The mirror-image theory of cooperative state enforcement of federal immigration law is a phenomenon—one of the most wildly successful legal ideas in decades. The mirror-image theory proposes that states can enact and enforce criminal immigration laws that are based on federal statutes. The theory that it is unobjectionable for a state to carry out federal policy is the basis of Arizona’s Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act—better known as SB 1070—and similar laws enacted in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, and Utah. The same theory has provoked the introduction of bills in numerous other states and earlier but more narrowly …

The Mechanics Of Federal Appeals: Uniformity And Case Management In The Circuit Courts, Marin K. Levy

Duke Law Journal

Case-management practices of appellate courts define the judicial review of appeals. The circuit courts constantly make decisions about which cases will receive oral argument, which will have dispositions written by staff attorneys in lieu of judges, and which will result in unpublished opinions—decisions that exert a powerful influence on the quality of justice that can be obtained from the federal appellate courts. Despite their importance, there has been no in-depth review of the case-management practices of the different circuit courts in the academic literature.

This Article begins to fill that void. It first documents and analyzes the practices of five …

The Admissibility Of Differential Diagnosis Testimony To Prove Causation In Toxic Tort Cases: The Interplay Of Adjective And Substantive Law, Joseph Sanders, Julie Machal-Fulks

Law and Contemporary Problems

This article uses the differential diagnosis opinions to explore a pair of interrelationships. The basic causal framework employed by most courts in toxic tort cases is presented. A key to understanding the developing case law in this area is to appreciate the degree to which the courts have adopted the interpretive conventions of science in assessing admissibility.

Too Many Probabilities: Statistical Evidence Of Tort Causation, David W. Barnes

Law and Contemporary Problems

Medical scientific testimony is often expressed in terms of two different probabilities: 1. The increased probability of harm if a person is exposed, for example, to a toxin. 2. The observed relationship is an artifact of the experimental method. This article demonstrates that neither probability, taken alone or together, measures whether the "preponderance of the evidence" test is met.

Scientific Models Of Human Health Risk Analysis In Legal And Policy Decisions, Douglas Crawford-Brown

Law and Contemporary Problems

The quality of scientific predictions of risk in the courtroom and policy arena rests in large measure on how the two differences between normal practice and the legal/policy practice of science are reconciled. This article considers a variety of issues that arise in reconciling these differences, and the problems that remain with scientific estimates of risk when these are used in decisions.

Assessing Causation In Breast Implant Litigation: The Role Of Science Panels, Laural L. Hooper, Joe S. Cecil, Thomas E. Willging

Law and Contemporary Problems

In two recent cases, federal judges appointed panels of scientific experts to help assess conflicting scientific testimony regarding causation of systemic injuries by silicone gel breast implants. This article will describe the circumstances that gave rise to the appointments, the procedures followed in making the appointments and reporting to the courts, and the reactions of the participants in the proceedings.

The Swine Flu Vaccine And Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Case Study In Relative Risk And Specific Causation, David A. Freedman, Philip B. Stark

Law and Contemporary Problems

This article discusses the role of epidemiologic evidence in toxic tort cases, focusing on relative risk. Whether specific causation can be inferred if a relative risk is above 2.0 is discussed. The object is to explore the scientific logic behind intuitions of relative risk.

Of Cherries, Fudge, And Onions: Science And Its Courtroom Perversion, David W. Peterson, John M. Conley

Law and Contemporary Problems

The thesis of this article is that the Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s focus on the scientific method, however rigorously applied, invites certain classes of abuses. There are instances in which evidence can be made to look more scientific by a process that in fact and substance makes is utterly unscientific.

Scientific Ignorance And Reliable Patterns Of Evidence In Toxic Tort Causation: Is There A Need For Liability Reform?, Carl F. Cranor, David A. Eastmond

Law and Contemporary Problems

As a first step to preserving the central aims of tort law, courts will need to recognize the wide variety of respectable, reliable patterns of evidence on which scientists themselves rely for drawing inferences about the toxicity of substances. Courts may also need to take further steps to address the woeful ignorance about the chemical universe. This may necessitate changes in the liability rules.

Causation And The Law: Preemption, Lawful Sufficiency, And Causal Sufficiency, Richard Fumerton, Ken Kress

Law and Contemporary Problems

This article briefly describes the normative/nonnormative distinction, and how one might invoke this distinction to locate a nonnormative dimension of actual causation. After briefly introducing Richard Wright's concept of a necessary element in a set of conditions for an effect, the article notes ambiguities in the critical concepts of necessity and sufficiency that he deploys. The article suggests the most plausible interpretation of Wright's use of different modal concepts.

Rationalism And Empiricism In Modern Medicine, Warren Newton

Law and Contemporary Problems

The roots of rationalism and empiricism in the Hippocratic tradition are explored. The triumph of the rationalists in the founding of modern medicine is emphasized. The development of clinical epidemiology and the evidence-based medicine over the last 30 years is described. The tension illuminates fundamental clinical and policy questions that doctors, the health care system, and the legal system confront today.

Causation, Contribution, And Legal Liability: An Empirical Study, Lawrence M. Solan, John M. Darley

Law and Contemporary Problems

This article presents empirical evidence of the ways people compare judgments of liability with judgments of causation and contribution. Specifically, the article reports the results of experiments designed to show whether people regard causation and enablement as necessary elements of liability.