Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Imagining Judges That Apply Law: How They Might Do It, James Maxeiner Oct 2009

Imagining Judges That Apply Law: How They Might Do It, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

"Judges should apply the law, not make it." That plea appears perennially in American politics. American legal scholars belittle it as a simple-minded demand that is silly and misleading. A glance beyond our shores dispels the notion that the American public is naive to expect judges to apply rather than to make law.

American obsession with judicial lawmaking has its price: indifference to judicial law applying. If truth be told, practically we have no method for judges, as a matter of routine, to apply law to facts. Our failure leads American legal scholars to question whether applying law to facts …


Toward A Revised 4.2 No-Contact Rule, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr. Mar 2009

Toward A Revised 4.2 No-Contact Rule, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr.

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Power, Protocol And Practicality: Communications From The District Court During An Appeal, Catherine T. Struve Jan 2009

Power, Protocol And Practicality: Communications From The District Court During An Appeal, Catherine T. Struve

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Time Out, Stephen B. Burbank Jan 2009

Time Out, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Standing For The Public: A Lost History, Elizabeth Magill Jan 2009

Standing For The Public: A Lost History, Elizabeth Magill

All Faculty Scholarship

This article recaptures a now-anachronistic approach to standing law that the Supreme Court followed in the middle decades of the 20th Century and explains how and when it died. It then speculates about why the federal courts retreated from the doctrine when they did. The now-anachronistic view of the permissible scope of standing, which is called here 'standing for the public,' permitted Congress to authorize parties who had no cognizable legal rights to challenge government action, in order to, as the Supreme Court itself said 'represent the public' and bring the government’s legal errors before the courts. Ironically, the federal …


Straw, Sand, And Sophistry, Stephen B. Burbank Jan 2009

Straw, Sand, And Sophistry, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Sensible Pragmatism In Federal Jurisdictional Policy, Tobias Barrington Wolff Jan 2009

Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Sensible Pragmatism In Federal Jurisdictional Policy, Tobias Barrington Wolff

All Faculty Scholarship

This article, written as part of a symposium celebrating the work of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the occasion of her fifteenth year on the Supreme Court, examines the strain of sensible legal pragmatism that informs Justice Ginsburg's writing in the fields of Civil Procedure and Federal Jurisdiction. Taking as its point of departure the Supreme Court's decision in City of Chicago v. International College of Surgeons, in which Ginsburg dissented, the article develops an argument against strict textualism in federal jurisdictional analysis. In its place, the article urges a purposive mode of interpretation that approaches jurisdictional text with a …