Law Commons^™

Book Review Of "How Judges Think" By Richard Posner, Charles D. Kelso, R. Randall Kelso

charles D. Kelso

This book review summarizes Judge Posner's presentation of how judges think and adds an evaluation.

Judiciary Must Take Bold Steps To Get Rid Of Backlog Of Cases, Dr. Zahidul Islam Biswas

Dr. Zahidul Islam

Backlog of cases appears to be a common predicament of the judiciaries worldwide. Countries from both developed and developing world have been facing this problem more or less alike. However, this difficulty for Bangladesh judiciary seems going from bad to worse every year. This article endeavours to explore the reasons behind the backlog of cases, and how to overcome the same.

The Demise Of The Law-Finding Jury In America And The Birth Of American Legal Science: History And Its Challenge For Contemporary Society, Jonathan R. Lahn

Jonathan R Lahn

Today we take for granted the division of labor in the courtroom whereby judges have the exclusive authority to determine the law applicable to a given case, while juries decide questions of fact. Yet this strict separation of powers did not become a fact of American legal life until the mid-19th Century, and was not recognized by the United States Supreme Court as a constitutional principle until the 1890s. Legal historians, while certainly aware of the tradition of the law-finding jury in early American legal practice, have thus far failed to fully explore its significance as a reflection of early …

Judicial Paradoxes, Randolph R. Goldman

Randolph R Goldman

Paradoxes naturally arise in law. Judges as meta level actors analyze a formal system of law when they render court decisions, but they also are object level actors in the very formal system they study. The study of formal sytems in logic provides key insights into law.

The Problematic Nature Of Contractionist Statutory Interpretations, Brian G. Slocum

Brian G. Slocum

The main thesis of Daniel B. Rodriguez and Barry R. Weingast's recent article, The Paradox of Expansionist Statutory Interpretations, 101 NW. U. L. REV. 1207 (2007), is important: the voting decisions of legislators can be influenced by the activist statutory interpretations of courts. Specifically, the authors demonstrate that the broad interpretations of progressive legislation made by courts in the 1960s and 1970s undermined the legislative deals struck between ardent supporters of progressive legislation and the moderate legislators necessary for passage of the statutes. Although these expansionist interpretations broadened the reach of important progressive legislation, they had the effect of discouraging …

Public Access And Media Rules For Administrative Adjudicators In High Profile Hearings, Chris Mcneil

Christopher B. McNeil, J.D., Ph.D.

This article offers a brief overview of the legal issues relevant to creating media access policies for administrative agencies. It also provides a model policy for use by executive-branch adjudicators in anticipation of high profile agency evidentiary hearings.

Motorists Are People Too: Recalculating The Vehicular Search Incident To Arrest Exception By Prohibiting Searches Incident To Arrests For Nonevidentiary Offenses, Rachel Moran

Rachel Moran

The United States Supreme Court must use Arizona v. Gant, for which the Court granted certiorari on February 25, 2008, as an opportunity to clarify the scope of the vehicular search incident to arrest exception by explicitly prohibiting searches which are not justified by the rationales of officer safety or evidence preservation, and which cannot uncover evidence related to the crime of arrest. To the extent that the Court’s 2004 decision in Thornton v. United States allowed a search only (at best) weakly justified by the rationales of officer safety or evidence preservation is problematic, the Supreme Court may simply …

Federal Courts As Constitutional Laboratories: The Rat's Point Of View, Maureen N. Armour

Maureen N Armour

This article examines the operation of the lower federal courts as constitutional laboratories where problems related to implementing the Supreme Court's problematic constitutional decisions are routinely addressed. By using the methodology of a detailed case study of Eighth Amendment litigation the author provides critical insights into the workings of the federal trial courts and three judge appellate panels and insights into the applied phenomenology of ajudicative discretion, the moving force of this judicial laboratory. The article also examines the problematic nature of the Supreme Court's constitutional decisions, their textual openness, doctrinal malleability,and prudential "errors," and how this effects the institutional …

Clearly, Using Intensifiers Is Very Bad--Or Is It?, Lance N. Long, William F. Chistensen

Lance N. Long

Although scholars have generally found that overusing intensifiers (words such as “clearly,” “obviously,” and “very”) negatively affects the persuasiveness or credibility of a legal argument, no one has studied actual appellate briefs to determine whether there is a relationship between intensifier use and the outcome of an appeal. This article describes two empirical studies of appellate briefs, which show that the frequent use of intensifiers in appellate briefs (particularly by an appellant) is usually associated with a statistically significant increase in adverse outcomes for an “offending” party. But--and this was an unexpected result--if an appellate opinion uses a high rate …

Evidence-Based Practice To Reduce Recidivism: Implications For State Judiciaries, Roger K. Warren

Roger K Warren

No abstract provided.

Hamdan V. Rumsfeld: A Legislative History Smorgasbord, John J. Miller

John J. Miller II

The Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld denied the government’s motion to dismiss the habeas appeal of Hamdan, bin Laden’s driver, who was being held at Guantanamo Bay. The majority, led by Justice Stevens, determined that the recently passed Detainee Treatment Act (DTA), which eliminated federal court jurisdiction to hear habeas appeals from detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, did not apply to pending cases, like Hamdan’s. This interpretation was supposedly strongly buttressed by the legislative history of the DTA. This essay outlines the arguments of the opponents and proponents of the use of legislative history, and then juxtaposes these arguments …

The Unrealized Promise Of Section 1983 Method-Of-Execution Challenges, Liam J. Montgomery

Liam J Montgomery

Prior to Hill v. McDonough, federal courts largely viewed method-of-execution challenges as being cognizable only through a petition for habeas corpus. Because federal habeas doctrine involves significant restrictions, such challenges were often difficult, if not impossible, to bring. This was particularly true, for instance, where an inmate had already litigated his first habeas petition and attempted to bring a later habeas corpus execution-protocol challenge: the rules against successive petitions nearly always prevented it, regardless of any newly-revealed factual or legal predicates for the challenge.

But Hill (and a predecessor case, Nelson v. Campbell) changed this framework: inmates could now challenge …

Res Judicata In The Icj’S Genocide Case: Implications For Other Courts And Tribunals?, Peter S. Prows, Michael Ottolenghi

Peter S Prows

The International Court of Justice’s (“ICJ”) 2007 Judgment in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide case (“Genocide case”) has, perhaps predictably, already attracted significant attention from the academic community. Much of this attention has focused on the merits of the judgment, but one commentator has suggested that the Genocide case will be remembered mostly “for the wider impact it will have on issues of res judicata and evidence.” While the important evidentiary issues in the Genocide case have started to generate their own commentary, the issue of res judicata has received …

Life And Death Decisions: Prosecutorial Discretion And Capital Punishment In Missouri, Katherine Barnes, David Sloss, Stephen Thaman

Katherine Barnes kbarnes@.wulaw.wustl.edu

This article presents the results of an empirical study of intentional homicide cases in Missouri. The authors created a database of 1046 cases; it includes substantially all of the homicide cases prosecuted in Missouri over a five year period that were initially charged as murder or voluntary manslaughter and that yielded criminal convictions. The authors selected 247 cases from the larger database for more detailed analysis. We analyzed geographic and racial disparities in the rates at which: prosecutors charge first-degree murder versus lesser charges; prosecutors seek the death penalty, not lesser punishments; defendants are convicted of first-degree murder versus lesser …

Wedging Open The Courthouse Doors: Federal Employee Access To Judicial Review Of Constitutional And Statutory Claims, Barbara A. Atkin, Elaine Kaplan, Gregory O'Duden

Barbara A. Atkin

This article addresses, in a comprehensive fashion, jurisdictional barriers that federal employees face in obtaining judicial review of statutory and constitutional claims. Many statutory claims that employees had previously brought in federal court are now precluded entirely by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Courts, however, retain jurisdiction where there are independent jurisdictional bases for review. They also traditionally have preserved their jurisdiction to grant equitable relief for constitutional violations. Determination of those types of government action for which Congress intended the CSRA remedies to be exclusive has been hotly litigated. In addition, even when the claims are not …

Sometimes You Have To Go Backwards To Go Forwards: Judicial Review And The New National Security Exception To The Fourth Amendment, Sheerin N. Shahinpoor

Sheerin N. Shahinpoor

National security concerns have historically provided a strong basis for non-justiciable Executive Branch action; however, post 9/11, such actions have grown to encompass a greater number of American citizens' civil liberties. The federal judiciary's deferential treatment of national-security related conduct, particularly in the realm of suspicionless searches, occurs with dangerous frequency, and any semblance of meaningful review has been nearly eviscerated. The stakes involved in national security are weighty and, in many instances, present the courts with an artificial choice: uphold a potentially over-zealous suspicionless-search program but avoid danger, or strike down such a program in favor of civil liberties …

Mis-Under-Standing Freedom From Religion: Two Cents On Madison's Three Pence, Kyle Duncan

Kyle Duncan

Forty years ago in Flast v. Cohen, the Supreme Court created, for Establishment Clause cases only, a dramatic exception to a bedrock principle of standing doctrine, based on one catchy phrase from a famous historical document—James Madison’s 1785 Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments. The Court has been notoriously bad at Establishment Clause history, but Flast seemed to push the envelope. Yet neither the Court nor commentators seemed to question Flast’s historical credentials over the last four decades. Recently, the Supreme Court took up the standing question again in Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. Unhappily, the justices’ various …

Even Better Than The Real Thing: How Courts Have Been Anything But Liberal In Finding Genuine Questions Raised As To The Authenticity Of Originals Under Rule 1003, Colin Miller

Colin Miller

In the common law days, parties seeking to prove the contents of documents were required to produce the original documents or account for their nonproduction. Pursuant to the Best Evidence Rule, if such parties neither produced the originals nor accounted for their nonproduction, courts prevented them from proving their contents through secondary evidence such as handwritten copies or testimony. With the invention of new technologies such as the process of xerography, however, states in the twentieth century began enacting exceptions to the Best Evidence Rule which allowed for the admission of duplicates created without manual transcription even when proponents could …

Litigation Discovery Cannot Be Optimal But Could Be Better: The Economics Of Improving Discovery Timing In A Digital Age, Scott A. Moss

Scott A Moss

Cases are won and lost in discovery, yet discovery draws surprisingly little academic attention. Most scholarship focuses on how much discovery to allow, not how courts decide discovery disputes – which, unlike trials, occur in most cases. Today, much evidence is “e-discovery” – imprudent emails or still-lingering “deleted” files – making costly discovery battles increasingly salient. But the e-discovery rules are not truly new, just a strengthening of old cost/benefit “proportionality” limits on discovery enacted when the spread of photocopiers similarly increased the amount of discovery. Proportionality limits are topic of broad consensus among civil procedure scholars as well as …

Federalism, The Rehnquist Court, And The Modern Republican Party, Bradley W. Joondeph

Bradley W. Joondeph

Most scholars agree that federalism was central to the Rehnquist Court’s constitutional agenda. But there is a part of the federalism story that has been largely overlooked: the Court's decisions involving the structural constraints on state governments, the most significant of which are preemption and the dormant Commerce Clause. This article makes two empirical claims about the Rehnquist Court’s federalism jurisprudence, one descriptive and one interpretive. The descriptive claim is that that the Court’s overall approach to federalism was more complicated than many have assumed, and it was not necessarily friendly to the states. To support this contention, I present …

Let’S Count Them All: Maryland Courts Should Adopt An Interventionist Approach To Contested Elections, John C. Armstrong

John C Armstrong

Maryland courts currently take a hands-off approach to challenges to contested elections. In this article, I argue that the Maryland Court of Appeals should overrule some of its precedent and adopt a more active role in judicial challenges to contested elections. In Part I, I discuss the current statutory provisions and case law covering contest elections in Maryland. In Part II, I propose a new test for court challenges to contested elections. In Part III, I briefly summarize federal case law and case law from other states that have adopted an approach similar to the test I advocate. In Part …

The Boundaries Of Contact Law In Cyberspace, Leon E. Trakman

Leon E Trakman Dean

Cyberspace has introduced novel ways in which to conclude, perform and terminate agreements. It has also raised doubts about whether traditional principles of contract law can adequately regulate new categories of contracts like click-wrap and browse-wrap agreements that were unheard of a few decades ago. This article explores these exciting new developments. Starting with an examination of late Nineteenth and early Twentieth adhesion contracts and the law of unconscionability, it evaluates innovations in contracting that have evolved since then. Uncovering the complexities associated with “wrap” contracts and End User Licensing Agreements [EULAs], it scrutinizes how legislatures and courts have responded …

An Aesthetic Defense Of The Non-Precedential Opinion: The Easy Cases Debate In The Wake Of The 2007 Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Appellate Procedure, Caleb E. Mason

Caleb E. Mason

Abstract: In this article I extol the virtues of the short, nonprecedential opinions (NPOs) that make up more than 80% of the output of the courts of appeals. The recent amendment to Fed. R. App. Proc. 32.1(a), requiring that all circuits allow citation to nonprecedential opinions, has provoked considerable debate about how, and whether, to issue opinions in the class of cases currently resolved by NPOs. I defend the issuance of NPOs not as a necessary concession to overwork, but rather as a valuable decisional form that plays a useful if not vital role in inculcating in practitioners the perceptual …

Popular Constitutionalism And Relaxing The Dead Hand: Can The People Be Trusted?, Todd E. Pettys

Todd E. Pettys

A growing number of constitutional scholars are urging the nation to rethink its commitment to judicial supremacy. Popular constitutionalists argue that the American people, not the courts, hold the ultimate authority to interpret the Constitution’s many open-ended provisions whose meanings are reasonably contestable. This Article defends popular constitutionalism on two important fronts. First, using originalism as a paradigmatic example of the ways in which courts frequently draw constitutional meaning from sources rooted deep in the past, the Article contends that defenders of judicial supremacy still have not persuasively responded to the familiar dead-hand query: Why should constitutional meanings that prevailed …

Learned Hand’S District Court Opinions, 1916-1917: A Macrostructural Analysis Employing Cognitive Psychology Principles, Jeffrey A. Van Detta

Jeffrey A. Van Detta

What makes a judge a good trial court writer? Should this be measured by the writing of the appeals court judges who review them? Does it even matter if trial court judges write well? Examining trial court opinions that Judge Learned Hand wrote 1916-1917 on the U.S. District Court, this article answers those questions by applying principles of cognitive psychology in a detailed critical evaluation of each opinion and its legal and society context. This article makes a very substantial contribution to the study of legal linguistics, cognitive psychology as applied in critical reading of judicial opinions, and of Learned …

Judiciary And The Administration Of Justice In Building And Constructon Disputes Under Kuwaiti Law, Mashael Alhajeri

Mashael Alhajeri

No abstract provided.

The Immoral Application Of Exclusionary Rules, Todd E. Pettys

Todd E. Pettys

In both civil and criminal cases today, judges routinely withhold relevant evidence from jurors, fearing that jurors would use it in an irrational or legally impermissible manner. Forcing jurors to take responsibility for a verdict based upon a government-screened pool of evidence stands in sharp contrast to the way we ordinarily think about government efforts to withhold potentially useful information from citizens faced with important decisions. The First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of speech, for example, reflects a moral judgment that the government offends its citizens’ deliberative autonomy when it restricts speech based upon fears about what that speech …

Book Review: Michael J. Perry, Toward A Theory Of Human Rights: Religion, Law, Courts (2007), Mark C. Modak-Truran

Mark C Modak-Truran

This book review analyzes Michael J. Perry's most recent book Toward a Theory of Human Rights: Religion, Law, Courts. Perry's book brings together two previously separate aspects of his thoughtful and pioneering scholarship dealing with the proper relation of morality (especially religious morality) to law and human rights and the role of courts in protecting human rights. Perry's argument concentrates on three related issues: whether the morality of human rights has a religious or secular ground or both, the relation between the morality of human rights and the law of human rights, and the proper role of courts in protecting …

Operationalizing Deterrence: Claims Management (In Hospitals, A Large Retailer, And Jails And Prisons), Margo Schlanger

Margo Schlanger

No abstract provided.

The Movement Toward Early Case Handling In Courts And Private Dispute Resolution, John Lande

John Lande

This article identifies early case handling (ECH) as an important general phenomenon in dispute system design theory and practice, catalogs the major ECH processes, and urges practitioners and policymakers to encourage use of and experimentation with ECH processes when appropriate. The key element of ECH is that people intentionally exercise responsibility for handling the case from the outset. ECH processes in courts include early case management procedures, differentiated case management systems, early neutral evaluation, and other early alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes. ECH in the private sector includes ADR pledges and contract clauses, early case assessment and ADR screening protocols, …