Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Duke Law (2)
- St. Mary's University (2)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
-
- Claremont Colleges (1)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- Selected Works (1)
- Technological University Dublin (1)
- The Peter A. Allard School of Law (1)
- Union College (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- University of San Diego (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (2)
- All Faculty Publications (1)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
-
- Dalhousie Law Journal (1)
- Duke Law Master of Judicial Studies Theses (1)
- Honors Theses (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Law School Blogs (1)
- Maine Law Review (1)
- Nancy Welsh (1)
- Publications (1)
- Reports (1)
- San Diego Law Review (1)
- Scholarly Publications (1)
- Scripps Senior Theses (1)
- Seattle University Law Review (1)
- St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 25 of 25
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
All Faculty Scholarship
Our aim in this essay is to leverage archival research, data and theoretical perspectives presented in our book, Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution against Federal Litigation, as a means to illuminate the prospects for retrenchment in the current political landscape. We follow the scheme of the book by separately considering the prospects for federal litigation retrenchment in three lawmaking sites: Congress, federal court rulemaking under the Rules Enabling Act, and the Supreme Court. Although pertinent data on current retrenchment initiatives are limited, our historical data and comparative institutional perspectives should afford a basis for informed prediction. Of course, little in …
Duets, Not Solos: The Mclachlin Court's Co-Authorship Legacy, Peter Mccormick
Duets, Not Solos: The Mclachlin Court's Co-Authorship Legacy, Peter Mccormick
Dalhousie Law Journal
This article explores the recentphenomenon of the formal co-authorship of Supreme Court decisions. It begins with a short history of the practice, primarily in the closing years of the Lamer Court but expanding steadily under McLachlin. A closer investigation reveals two critically important dimensions: first, the practice is skewed toward the Court's more important decisions (measured in terms of subject matter legal complexity, interveners, and subsequent citation); and second, its diffusion across the Court's membership refutes the possibility that it simply reinforces persisting cleavages. This new practice represents a more overtly collegial format directed to the Court's more significant decisions. …
Punitive Preemption And The First Amendment, Rachel Proctor May
Punitive Preemption And The First Amendment, Rachel Proctor May
San Diego Law Review
In recent years, state legislators have begun passing a new breed of “punitive” preemption laws–those that impose fines, civil and criminal sanctions, and other sanctions on local governments and their officials as a consequence of passing laws or enacting policies that are inconsistent with state laws. This represents a significant change from traditional preemption, under which a local government could enact laws based on its view of preempting state statutes and applicable state constitutional provisions and, if necessary, defend its interpretation in court. When punitive preemption prevents a local lawmaking process from taking place, the state forecloses a unique form …
Making Deals In Court-Connected Mediation: What's Justice Got To Do With It?, Nancy A. Welsh
Making Deals In Court-Connected Mediation: What's Justice Got To Do With It?, Nancy A. Welsh
Nancy Welsh
When mediation was first introduced to the courts, the process was hailed as “alternative.” Mediation gave disputants the opportunity to discuss and resolve their dispute themselves; the role of the third party was to facilitate the disputants’ negotiations, not to dictate the outcome; and because the disputants were able to focus on their underlying interests in mediation, the process could result in creative, customized solutions. The picture of mediation is changing, however, as the process settles into its role as a tool for the resolution of personal injury, contract, and other nonfamily cases on the courts’ civil dockets. Attorneys dominate …
The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell
The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
This Article addresses an issue courts across the country continue to struggle with: When are ethics rules appropriately considered enforceable substantive obligations, and when should they only be enforceable through the disciplinary process? The question is complicated by the ethics rules themselves. Paragraph 20 of the Scope section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct includes seemingly contradictory guidance; it states the Rules are not to be used to establish civil liability, but also that they can be “some evidence” of a violation of a lawyer’s standard of care. Most states have adopted this paradoxal Paragraph 20 language. Consequently, courts …
What Makes A Good Judge?, Brian M. Barry
What Makes A Good Judge?, Brian M. Barry
Reports
This article overviews research demonstrating the factors beyond the law that can affect judicial decision-making.
“Who Will Judge The Many When The Game Isthrough?”: Considering The Profound Differencesbetween Mental Health Courts And “Traditional”Involuntary Civil Commitment Courts, Michael L. Perlin
“Who Will Judge The Many When The Game Isthrough?”: Considering The Profound Differencesbetween Mental Health Courts And “Traditional”Involuntary Civil Commitment Courts, Michael L. Perlin
Seattle University Law Review
For forty years, we have known that involuntary civil commitment hearings are—in most jurisdictions—“charades.” When the Supreme Court noted, in Parham v. J.R., that the average length of a civil commitment hearing ranged from 3.8 to 9.2 minutes, the reaction of many who had done these cases was, “What? So long?!” The characterization of such hearings as being a “greased runway” to a state institution has never been disputed. Lawyers representing these individuals were bored or contemptuous; judges simply wanted to get cases moving; opposing counsel looked at their wrist watches to see when the cases would be done. This …
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared Goldstein's Blog: Masterpiece Cakeshop Ruling: No Constitutional Right To Discriminate (For Now) 06-05-2018, Jared A. Goldstein
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared Goldstein's Blog: Masterpiece Cakeshop Ruling: No Constitutional Right To Discriminate (For Now) 06-05-2018, Jared A. Goldstein
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Deference To Deference: Examining The Relationship Between The Courts And The Political Branches Through Judicial Deference And The Chevron Doctrine, Christopher Yao
Deference To Deference: Examining The Relationship Between The Courts And The Political Branches Through Judicial Deference And The Chevron Doctrine, Christopher Yao
Honors Theses
Judicial review of agency rulemaking sits atop a nexus between all three branches of American government, the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. Chevron v. NRDC (1984), a landmark case in administrative law, and its resulting doctrine of strong judicial deference to agencies in their interpretations of statute, are paradoxical in their creation. Although Chevron was decided at the height of Reagan-era deregulation, it greatly enhanced the power of administrative agencies, allowing them to reinterpret the meaning of their statutory directives as needed to justify changes to regulations with less scrutiny from the courts. It is only in recent years …
Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen
Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming
The Federal–State Standing Gap: How To Enforce Federal Law In Federal Court Without Article Iii Standing, Peter N. Salib, David K. Suska
The Federal–State Standing Gap: How To Enforce Federal Law In Federal Court Without Article Iii Standing, Peter N. Salib, David K. Suska
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
You, too, can sue Donald Trump under the Emoluments Clause!
Since Inauguration Day, several lawsuits have been filed against President Trump because of his refusal to divest certain assets. They assert that Trump’s business interests conflict with the Emoluments Clause of Article I. That arcane provision forbids certain federal officials from accepting any perquisite or gain from a foreign monarch or state. The suits contend, for example, that a foreign dignitary’s booking of a room at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. would constitute an unlawful emolument.
Most commentators quickly threw cold water on the prospect of any plaintiff …
Report Of The Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts, Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts
Report Of The Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts, Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts
Maine Law Review
The Commission on Gender, Justice, and the Courts was established by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in January 1993, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices in 1988 urging the creation of task forces to study gender bias and minority concerns within court systems. In recent years, forty-one states, the District of Columbia, and two federal circuits have established task forces on gender bias in the courts as part of a continuing effort to achieve equality for women and men in American society. These jurisdictions recognized that access to a neutral and unbiased court is essential …
The Lottery Docket, Daniel Epps, William Ortman
The Lottery Docket, Daniel Epps, William Ortman
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
A Comparison Of The American Model And French (-Inspired) Appellate Model, Frederic Blockx
A Comparison Of The American Model And French (-Inspired) Appellate Model, Frederic Blockx
Duke Law Master of Judicial Studies Theses
Both the American and the French legal system have a three-tiered structure. However, the respective roles and functions of the courts on each step of the ladder is vastly different in both. Whereas the general system in the U.S. is to have one trial court and two ‘higher’ courts (a court of appeals and a supreme court), the French / European continental system consists of two ‘factual’ courts (the basic level and the court of appeals), and one ‘legal’ (the supreme court) with limited or even inexistent possibilities to look at the facts.
The purpose of this thesis is to …
A Reflection On The Ethics Of Movement Lawyering, Susan Carle, Scott L. Cummings
A Reflection On The Ethics Of Movement Lawyering, Susan Carle, Scott L. Cummings
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
This essay takes a new look at legal ethics issues salient to "movement lawyers" who maintain a sustained commitment to social movement goals and collaborate with social movement organizations over time to achieve them. The essay provides a historical overview of movement lawyering, tracing its development to current practice in which movement lawyers work in collaboration with mobilized social movement groups, though not always in traditional lawyer-client relationships. As this analysis reveals, contemporary movements employ a sophisticated array of strategies, which may pull lawyers away from traditional representation paradigms. We argue that the legal ethics literature on movement lawyering must …
Court Capture, Jonas Anderson
Court Capture, Jonas Anderson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Capture — the notion that a federal agency can become controlled by the industry the agency is supposed to be regulating — is a fundamental concern for administrative law scholars. Surprisingly, however, no thorough treatment of how capture theory applies to the federal judiciary has been done. The few scholars who have attempted to apply the insights of capture theory to federal courts have generally concluded that the federal courts are insulated from capture concerns.
This Article challenges the notion that the federal courts cannot be captured. It makes two primary arguments. As an initial matter, this Article makes the …
Aspirations Of Objectivity: Systemic Illusions Of Justice In The Biased Courtroom, Meagan B. Roderique
Aspirations Of Objectivity: Systemic Illusions Of Justice In The Biased Courtroom, Meagan B. Roderique
Scripps Senior Theses
Given the ever-growing body of evidence surrounding implicit bias in and beyond the institution of the law, there is an equally growing need for the law to respond to the accurate science of prejudice in its aspiration to objective practice and just decision-making. Examined herein are the existing legal conceptualizations of implicit bias as utilized in the courtroom; implicit bias as peripheral to law and implicit bias as effectual in law, but not without active resolution. These views and the interventional methods, materials, and procedures they inspire are widely employed to appreciably “un-bias” legal actors and civic participants; however, without …
The Disruptive Neuroscience Of Judicial Choice, Anna Spain Bradley
The Disruptive Neuroscience Of Judicial Choice, Anna Spain Bradley
Publications
Scholars of judicial behavior overwhelmingly substantiate the historical presumption that most judges act impartially and independent most of the time. The reality of human behavior, however, says otherwise. Drawing upon untapped evidence from neuroscience, this Article provides a comprehensive evaluation of how bias, emotion, and empathy—all central to human decision-making—are inevitable in judicial choice. The Article offers three novel neuroscientific insights that explain why this inevitability is so. First, because human cognition associated with decision-making involves multiple, and often intersecting, neural regions and circuits, logic and reason are not separate from bias and emotion in the brain. Second, bias, emotion, …
Introduction: Canada's Chief Justice: Beverley Mclachlin's Legacy Of Law And Leadership, Marcus Moore
Introduction: Canada's Chief Justice: Beverley Mclachlin's Legacy Of Law And Leadership, Marcus Moore
All Faculty Publications
Summarizes the legacy of law and leadership of Beverley McLachlin, the longest-serving Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada (2000-2017), and first female Chief Justice.
Crowdsourcing & Data Analytics: The New Settlement Tools, Christopher Robertson, Bernard Chao, David Yokum
Crowdsourcing & Data Analytics: The New Settlement Tools, Christopher Robertson, Bernard Chao, David Yokum
Faculty Scholarship
By protecting the right to a jury, the State and Federal Constitutions recognize the fundamental value of having civil and criminal disputes resolved by laypersons. However actual trials are relatively rare, in part because parties seek to avoid the risks and cost of trials, and courts seek to clear dockets efficiently. Even as settlement may be desirable, it is sometimes difficult to resolve a dispute. Parties naturally view their cases from different perspectives, and these perspectives often cause both sides to be overly optimistic, seeking unreasonably large or unreasonably small resolutions.
This article describes a novel method of incorporating layperson …
Erie As A Way Of Life, Ernest A. Young
Trouble Counting To Three: Circuit Splits And Confusion In Interpreting The Prison Litigation Reform Act's Three Strikes Rule, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(G), Molly Guptill Manning
Trouble Counting To Three: Circuit Splits And Confusion In Interpreting The Prison Litigation Reform Act's Three Strikes Rule, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(G), Molly Guptill Manning
Articles & Chapters
No abstract provided.
Comparative Approaches To Constitutional History, Jamal Greene, Yvonne Tew
Comparative Approaches To Constitutional History, Jamal Greene, Yvonne Tew
Faculty Scholarship
An historical approach to constitutional interpretation draws upon original intentions or understandings of the meaning or application of a constitutional provision. Comparing the ways in which courts in different jurisdictions use history is a complex exercise. In recent years, academic and judicial discussion of “originalism” has obscured both the global prevalence of resorting to historical materials as an interpretive resource and the impressive diversity of approaches courts may take to deploying those materials. This chapter seeks, in Section B, to develop a basic taxonomy of historical approaches. Section C explores in greater depth the practices of eight jurisdictions with constitutional …
Studying The "New" Civil Judges, Anna E. Carpenter, Jessica K. Steinberg, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark
Studying The "New" Civil Judges, Anna E. Carpenter, Jessica K. Steinberg, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark
Faculty Scholarship
We know very little about the people and institutions that make up the bulk of the United States civil justice system: state judges and state courts. Our understanding of civil justice is based primarily on federal litigation and the decisions of appellate judges. Staggeringly little legal scholarship focuses on state courts and judges. We simply do not know what most judges are doing in their day-to-day courtroom roles or in their roles as institutional actors and managers of civil justice infrastructure. We know little about the factors that shape and influence judicial practices, let alone the consequences of those practices …
The Federal Equity Power, Michael T. Morley
The Federal Equity Power, Michael T. Morley
Scholarly Publications
Throughout the first century and a half of our nation’s history, federal courts treated equity as a type of general law. They applied a uniform, freestanding body of principles derived from the English Court of Chancery to all equitable issues that came before them, regardless of whether a case arose under federal or state law. In 1945, in Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, the United States Supreme Court held that, notwithstanding the changes wrought by the Erie Doctrine, federal courts may continue to rely on these traditional principles of equity to determine the availability of equitable relief, such as injunctions, …