Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
University Of Baltimore Symposium Report: Debut Of “The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America”, Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal
University Of Baltimore Symposium Report: Debut Of “The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America”, Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal
Zena Denise Crenshaw-Logal
On the first of each two day symposium of the Fogg symposia, lawyers representing NGOs in the civil rights, judicial reform, and whistleblower advocacy fields are to share relevant work of featured legal scholars in lay terms; relate the underlying principles to real life cases; and propose appropriate reform efforts. Four (4) of the scholars spend the next day relating their featured articles to views on the vitality of stare decisis. Specifically, the combined panels of public interest attorneys and law professors consider whether compliance with the doctrine is reasonably assured in America given the: 1. considerable discretion vested in …
Do We Have 18th Century Courts For The 21st Century, Michael Buenger
Do We Have 18th Century Courts For The 21st Century, Michael Buenger
Michael Buenger
State courts continue to face both funding and political challenges. In light of these challenges state court leaders, the bar and legal educators should undertake a serious rethinking of our state courts along three thematic lines: (1) systemic reorganization to reduce fragmentation, simplify access, and provide greater flexibility and specialization in the use of resources; (2) diversification of dispute resolution processes so that cases move in different directions with a range of resolution options pegged to the issues presented; and (3) rationalization of governance, leadership, and accountability systems to enhance effective organizational management of complex institutions.
Anti-Evasion Doctrines In Constitutional Law, Brannon P. Denning, Michael B. Kent
Anti-Evasion Doctrines In Constitutional Law, Brannon P. Denning, Michael B. Kent
Brannon P. Denning
Recent constitutional scholarship has focused on how courts—the Supreme Court in particular—“implements” constitutional meaning through the use of doctrinal constructs that enable judges to decide cases. Judges first fix constitutional meaning, what Mitchell Berman terms the “constitutional operative proposition,” but must then design “decision rules” that render the operative proposition suitable to use in the third step, the resolution of the case before the court. These decision rules produce the familiar apparatus of constitutional decisionmaking—strict scrutiny, rational basis review, and the like. For the most part, writers have adopted a binary view of doctrine. Doctrinal tests can defer or not …