Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Judicial Partisanship In A Partisan Era: A Reply To Professor Robertson, Dmitry Bam
Judicial Partisanship In A Partisan Era: A Reply To Professor Robertson, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
Professor Cassandra Burke Robertson’s outstanding article, Judicial Impartiality in A Partisan Era, is timely given the increasing politicization of the judiciary. The political debate and controversy around the Judge Garland nomination and the Justice Kavanaugh confirmation to the United States Supreme Court, only served to reaffirm that the judiciary is not immune from the growing political polarization in America. And it is not just senate judicial confirmation battles that have become highly bitter and partisan. Scholars writing about the substantive work of the Court have argued that it is more akin to a political body than a judicial one, and …
Comparison Excluding Commitments: Incommensurability, Adjudication, And The Unnoticed Example Of Trade Disputes, Sungjoon Cho, Richard Warner
Comparison Excluding Commitments: Incommensurability, Adjudication, And The Unnoticed Example Of Trade Disputes, Sungjoon Cho, Richard Warner
All Faculty Scholarship
We claim that there are important cases of “incommensurability” in public policymaking, in which all relevant reasons are not always comparable on a common scale as better, worse, or equally good. Courts often fail to confront this. We are by no means the first to contend that incommensurability exists. Yet incommensurability’s proponents have failed to sway the courts mainly because they overlook the fact that there are two types of incommensurability. The first (“incompleteness incommensurability”) consists of the lack of any appropriate metric for making the comparison. We argue that this type of incommensurability is relatively unproblematic in that courts …
Legal Process In A Box, Or What Class Action Waivers Teach Us About Law-Making, Rhonda Wasserman
Legal Process In A Box, Or What Class Action Waivers Teach Us About Law-Making, Rhonda Wasserman
Articles
The Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion advanced an agenda found in neither the text nor the legislative history of the Federal Arbitration Act. Concepcion provoked a maelstrom of reactions not only from the press and the academy, but also from Congress, federal agencies and lower courts, as they struggled to interpret, apply, reverse, or cabin the Court’s blockbuster decision. These reactions raise a host of provocative questions about the relationships among the branches of government and between the Supreme Court and the lower courts. Among other questions, Concepcion and its aftermath force us to grapple with the …