Law Commons^™

Guarding The Guardians: Judicial Councils And Judicial Independence, Tom Ginsburg, Nuno Garoupa

Tom Ginsburg

This Article uses comparative evidence to inform the ongoing debate about the selection and discipline of judges. In recent decades, many countries around the world have created judicial councils, institutions designed to maintain an appropriate balance between judicial independence and accountability. Our Article has two aims. First, we provide a theory of the formation of judicial councils and identify some of the dimensions along which they differ. Second, we test the extent to which different designs of judicial council affect judicial quality. We find that there is little relationship between councils and quality. We also offer a positive explanation for …

Friction By Design: The Necessary Contest Of State Judicial Power And Legislative Policymaking, Michael Buenger

Michael Buenger

Courts in the United States have always played an important policymaking role through the exercise of judicial review. Much of our understanding of judicial power and judicial review is based on its exercise in the federal courts. Little attention has been paid to the intersection of judicial power and legislative policymaking at the state level. The tendency to examine judicial power through the lens of the federal bench miscasts the history of the American judiciary and fails to account for the unique role state courts perform as components of quasi-independent states. Even federal judicial review is rooted in state judicial …

The Intersection Of Judicial Attitudes And Litigant Selection Theories: Explaining U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making, Jeff L. Yates, Elizabeth Coggins

Jeff L Yates

Two prominent theories of legal decision making provide seemingly contradictory explanations for judicial outcomes. In political science, the Attitudinal Model suggests that judicial outcomes are driven by judges' sincere policy preferences -- judges bring their ideological inclinations to the decision making process and their case outcome choices largely reflect these policy preferences. In contrast, in the law and economics literature, Priest and Klein's well-known Selection Hypothesis posits that court outcomes are largely driven by the litigants' strategic choices in the selection of cases for formal dispute or adjudication -- forward thinking litigants settle cases where potential judicial outcomes are readily …

Zippo-Ing The Wrong Way: How The Internet Has Misdirected The Federal Courts In Their Personal Jurisdiction Analysis, Catherine Ross Dunham

Catherine Ross Dunham

ZIPPO-ING THE WRONG WAY: HOW THE INTERNET HAS MISDIRECTED THE FEDERAL COURTS IN THEIR PERSONAL JURISDICTION ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT

In 1997, the Federal District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania evaluated one in a line of emerging personal jurisdiction cases that raised the question of whether Internet-based contacts with citizens of the forum state can alone establish the defendant purposefully established contacts with the forum state. In this unlikely watershed case, Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, the District Court wrangled with the new concept of purposeful availment through electronic contact with the forum state. The court viewed Zippo …

Another Jackpot (In)Justice: Verdict Variability And Issue Preclusion In Mass Torts, Byron G. Stier

Byron G. Stier

If there are no prior inconsistent verdicts, non-mutual offensive issue preclusion generally allows a finding by a single jury to bar relitigation, in future cases, of the issue by the defendant who lost in the prior case. This approach, however, ignores the possibility that the first verdict delivered may have been an outlier if further verdicts were permitted to be delivered. In mass tort litigation, such a flawed approach may result in critical issues such as defect or negligence being resolved by only six jurors, whose potentially outlier verdict is then applied to resolve the cases of thousands, perhaps bankrupting …

Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals And The Local Construction Of Reliability, Robert R. Robinson

Robert R Robinson

Scholars considering how expert testimony will fare under Daubert often apply the four dicta referenced by Justice Blackmun (testing, peer-review, error rate, and general acceptance) to determine whether such testimony will be admissible. In this article I critique this approach, contending that admissibility decisions cannot be adequately predicted by Daubert itself. Daubert has no clear legal rule for judges to apply, has no cognizable position on the degree of scrutiny expert testimony should face, and has no clear stance—even given the dicta—on what constitutes “good science.” When combined with the relative autonomy trial judges possess in making admissibility decisions, Daubert’s …

The Judicial Ethics Of Criminal Law Adjudication, Keith Swisher

Keith Swisher

Judges in the United States regularly (and often harshly) are disciplined for “bad” criminal law decisions. On a number of levels, it is baffling that this ethical “Rule” — punishing judges for errors of adjudication — has never been the subject of in-depth critical analysis. Thus, this Article is surprisingly the first scholarly work fully deconstructing the Rule (along with attendant considerations in criminal law adjudication) and addressing directly many of the tough questions that have been avoided or mistreated. This Article begins by examining an unexamined, “yet earthshaking” movement—that is, the modern invention of using judicial conduct commissions (“judge …

Writing: "It" Is A Start; Getting "It" Read Is The Goal., Timothy Blevins

Timothy D Blevins

The want or need to publish begins with writing the document. Once the decision is made to write, and a subject identified, the writer must focus on the reader. A one size fits all attitude toward writing can result in a negative impression with a publication's editors.

The Significance Of The Shift Toward As-Applied Challenges In Election Law, Joshua A. Douglas

Joshua A. Douglas

Last Term, the Supreme Court decided two election law cases that had significant implications for the ability of political actors to bring challenges to a state’s election regime. In Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party and Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (the voter ID case), the Court rejected facial challenges to the laws and boldly stated that political actors may only challenge election laws as applied. In essence, this means that voters and others no longer can achieve pre-election, prospective relief, instead having to endure at least one election cycle under a law that might be invalid …

L'Épreuve Orale. Les Magistrats Administratifs Face Aux Audiences De Reconduite À La Frontière, Mathilde Cohen

Mathilde Cohen

We Have Met The Special Interests, And We Are They, Michael R. Dimino

Michael R Dimino

Inside The Marble Palace: The Domestication Of The Supreme Court (Reviewing Christopher Buckley, Supreme Courtship), Laura K. Ray

Laura K. Ray

No abstract provided.

The Duty Of Treatment: Human Rights And The Hiv/Aids Pandemic, Noah B. Novogrodsky

Noah B Novogrodsky

This article argues that the treatment of HIV and AIDS is spawning a juridical, advocacy and enforcement revolution. The intersection of AIDS and human rights was once characterized almost exclusively by anti-discrimination and destigmatization efforts. Today, human rights advocates are demanding life-saving treatment and convincing courts and legislatures to make states pay for it. Using a comparative Constitutional law methodology that places domestic courts at the center of the struggle for HIV treatment, this article shows how the provision of AIDS medications is reframing the right to health and the implementation of socio-economic rights. First, it locates an emerging right …

The Law Clerk Proxy Wars: Secrecy, Accountability, And Ideology In The Supreme Court (2009) (Review) Sorcerers' Apprentices: 100 Years Of Law Clerks At The United States Supreme Court, Carolyn Shapiro

Carolyn Shapiro

No abstract provided.

The Bar’S Extraordinarily Powerful Role In Selecting The Kansas Supreme Court, Stephen Ware

Stephen Ware

Three Terms Of The Kennedy Court: Projecting The Future Of Constitutional Doctrine, Kenneth M. Murchison

Kenneth M Murchison

This Article evaluates the likely direction of constitutional doctrine now that Justice Kennedy is clearly the pivotal justice on most controversial constitutional issues. The article begins with a summary of Justice Kennedy’s positions on a range of constitutional issues and of his influence on constitutional doctrine in the decade before Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito joined the Court. It then examines the closely divided decisions of the last three terms and projects how constitutional doctrine is likely to change for the foreseeable future. Finally, it considers the extent to which stare decisis, changes in Justice Kennedy’s thought, and the …

How Mandatory Are Mandatory Minimums? How Judges Can Avoid Imposing Mandatory Minimum Sentences, Nathan A. Greenblatt

Nathan A Greenblatt

Mandatory minimum sentences are anathema to judges due to, it is commonly said, judges’ “utter lack of power to do anything for the exceptional defendants that move them.” In the case of Weldon Angelos, for example, U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell lamented that sentencing Mr. Angelos to 55 years in prison “is unjust, cruel, and even irrational. [The court] reluctantly concludes that it has no choice.” The Judicial Conference has consistently opposed mandatory minimum sentences for more than 50 years, because it, too, has concluded that mandatory sentences give judges no choice in sentencing. Indeed, the U.S. Sentencing Commission recently …

Promoting An Independent Judiciary As A Rule Of Law Principle: A Brief Commentary On The Supreme Court Of Pakistan, Kamaal Zaidi

Kamaal Zaidi

The rule of law is often difficult to establish in developing nations characterized by frequent political changes and unstable events that affect the separation of powers between the three branches of government – the executive, legislature, and judiciary. In particular, the integrity of the judiciary is often damaged by influences from the executive and legislative branches in that core democratic principles are promoted, including civil liberties, the supremacy of law, law and order, and transparency and accountability among government actors. In Pakistan, turbulent political events over the years have irreparably damaged the ability of the Supreme Court of Pakistan to …

Direct Application Of International Commercial Law In Chinese Courts: Intellectual Property, Trade, And International Transportation, Jie Huang

Jie Huang

Different from scholarship that focuses on the relationship between China and International Law regarding territory, armed conflicts, human rights violations, this article explores the relationship between China and International Law in a commercial setting. It explores how Chinese courts apply international commercial law in adjudicating cases involving foreign factors. Moreover, this article goes beyond contemporary scholarship that concerns international commercial law and China but only focuses on the text of Chinese statutes and judicial interpretations: it elaborates how courts apply statutes and judicial interpretations in actual adjudications through cases studies. By covering cases decided by the Supreme People’s Court and …

Who's Your Daddy?: A Psychoanalytic Exegesis Of The Supreme Court's Recent Patent Jurisprudence, Gretchen S. Sween

Gretchen S. Sween

ABSTRACT Who’s Your Daddy?: A Psychoanalytic Exegesis of the Supreme Court’s Recent Patent Jurisprudence Gretchen S. Sween, Ph.D., J.D. Dechert LLP 300 W. 6th Street Suite 1850 Austin, TX 78701 gretchen.sween@dechert.com Since a new administration took office in 2001, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in, and then decided, twelve patent cases in six years. Even more extraordinary is the Supreme Court’s remarkable consistency during this recent incursion into patent law: it has either reversed, vacated, and/or remanded Federal Circuit decisions in each instance in opinions that have been unanimous or nearly unanimous. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s rhetoric in formulating …

The Food Stays In The Kitchen: Everything I Needed To Know About Statutory Interpretation I Learned By The Time I Was Nine, Hillel Levin

Hillel Levin

Based on a true story, this brief Essay begins with a proclamation by Mother, the Supreme Lawmaker, that "no food may be eaten outside the kitchen." What follows is a series of rulings by Judges--father, babysitter, grandma (a liberal jurist, of course), and others--who, using traditional tools of interpretation, eventually declare it to mean that all food may be eaten outside of the kitchen. Ultimately, the supreme lawmaker reacts and clarifies.

The piece is meant to demonstrate the following:

* We all regularly use the basic tools and modes of statutory interpretation;

* When we interpret pronouncements in real life, …

Constitution By Compromise, Howard Schweber, Amnon Cavari

Howard Schweber

The question of empowering the court and the limits of constitutional protection are at the heart of the debate over constitutional design in Israel. Lacking a comprehensive written constitution, Israel nonetheless has a set of basic laws which encompass many of the functions of a constitutional text making it a near-complete constitution. Nonetheless, there continues to be considerable support for the idea of a single, formally adopted constitutional text. Recently, several proposals have been brought to the forefront of political discussions through the actions of various interest groups outside the government, and energized and committed efforts by government officials and …

Crowning The New King: The Statutory Arbitrator And The Demise Of Judicial Review, Michael H. Leroy

Michael H LeRoy

Judicial review of arbitration awards is highly deferential, but when does it become rubber stamping? Using original data, I find that federal courts vacated only 4.3 percent of 162 disputed awards. Nearly the same result was observed for a sub-sample of 44 employment discrimination awards under Title VII. By comparison, federal appeals courts in 2006 reversed 12.9 percent of 5,917 rulings made by civil court judges on the merits of legal claims.

Why are the rulings of Article III judges scrutinized more than the awards of citizen-arbitrators? What does this mean when companies can avoid Article III court rulings by …

Will Video Kill The Trial Courts' Star? How "Hot" Records Will Change The Appellate Process, Leah A. Walker

Leah A Walker

No abstract provided.

United States V. Hatahley: A Legal Archaeology Case Study In Law And Racial Conflict, Debora L. Threedy

Debora L. Threedy

This paper is a case study of United States v. Hatahley, a leading case in the Remedies canon, using the methodology of “legal archaeology” to reconstruct the historical, social and economic context of the litigation. In 1953, a group of individual Navajos brought suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the destruction of over a hundred horses and burros. The first section of the paper presents two contrasting narratives for the case. The first relates what we know about the case from the reported opinions, while the second locates the litigated case within the larger social context by examining …

The Truth Be Damned: The First Amendment, Attorney Speech, And Judicial Reputation, Margaret C. Tarkington

Margaret C Tarkington

Throughout the United States, courts discipline and sanction attorneys who make disparaging remarks about the judiciary. Yet, in that context, state and federal courts have almost universally rejected the constitutional standard established by the Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan for punishing speech regarding government officials. Indeed, some courts even deny attorneys the defense of truth. Attorneys have been punished even when they were not engaged in a representative capacity and regardless of the forum in which they made their statements (including to the press, in pamphlets, or even in personal letters). The punishment imposed for impugning judicial …

The Duty Of Treatment: Human Rights And The Hiv/Aids Pandemic, Noah B. Novogrodsky

Noah B Novogrodsky

This article argues that the treatment of HIV and AIDS is spawning a juridical, advocacy and enforcement revolution. The intersection of AIDS and human rights was once characterized almost exclusively by anti-discrimination and destigmatization efforts. Today, human rights advocates are demanding life-saving treatment and convincing courts and legislatures to make states pay for it. Using a comparative Constitutional law methodology that places domestic courts at the center of the struggle for HIV treatment, this article shows how the provision of AIDS medications is reframing the right to health and the implementation of socio-economic rights. First, it locates an emerging right …

A Fighting Chance: An Analysis Of The Role Of Social Science Evidence In Higher Education Affirmative Action And K-12 Voluntary Desegregation Cases, Crystal Gafford Muhammad

Crystal Gafford Muhammad

The present inquiry focuses on the role of social science evidence contemporarily, using observations from judicial opinions in race conscious admissions cases. Using a set of judicial opinions from K-12 voluntary desegregation and higher education affirmative action in admissions, I use legal and statistical analysis to argue that social science data presented into evidence is of limited effect. In fact, I find judicial political philosophy is the greatest predictor of opinions in this area of law. However, the question is not whether social science evidence is influential or even persuasive, but whether it is useful in politically contentious cases. It …

The Meaning, Measure, And Misuse Of Standards Of Review, Amanda J. Peters

Amanda J Peters

Standards of review are critical to appellate review because they set limitations upon the appellate court's review process. In doing so, standards of review balance judicial authority, make judicial review more efficient, standardize the review process, and give notice to parties who wish to appeal their cases. However, these policies and their effects are diminished when appellate judges misuse or ignore standards of review.

This article examines the theories that led to the creation of standards of review and identifies four ways that appellate courts misuse standards of review. It analyzes over 8,000 cases from Texas and California, along with …

Into The Twilight Zone: Informing Judicial Discretion In Federal Sentencing, Mary K. Ramirez

mary k ramirez

Into the Twilight Zone: Informing Judicial Discretion in Federal Sentencing

Recent changes in federal sentencing have shifted discretionary decision-making back to federal district court judges, while appellate courts review challenged sentences for reasonableness. Each judge brings considerable legal experience and qualifications to the bench, however, cultural experiences cannot necessarily prepare judges for the range of persons or situations they will address on the bench. Social psychologists who have studied social cognition have determined that the human brain creates categories and associations resulting in implicit biases and associations that are often unconscious or subconscious. Moreover, research suggests that such biases may …