Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (190)
- Constitutional Law (89)
- Civil Procedure (80)
- Jurisdiction (59)
- Judges (37)
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (25)
- Litigation (25)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (22)
- Supreme Court of the United States (22)
- Criminal Law (21)
- Law and Society (20)
- Legislation (19)
- Criminal Procedure (18)
- Legal Studies (18)
- Conflict of Laws (14)
- Legal Profession (14)
- Jurisprudence (13)
- State and Local Government Law (12)
- Administrative Law (11)
- Law and Politics (11)
- Legal History (10)
- Civil Law (8)
- Torts (8)
- Arts and Humanities (7)
- Evidence (7)
- Labor and Employment Law (7)
- Legal Remedies (7)
- President/Executive Department (7)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (7)
- Institution
-
- Selected Works (58)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (46)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (45)
- William & Mary Law School (42)
- University of North Carolina School of Law (39)
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (20)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (17)
- University of South Carolina (14)
- American University Washington College of Law (11)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (10)
- Notre Dame Law School (9)
- West Virginia University (7)
- Fordham Law School (6)
- New York Law School (5)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (5)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (4)
- The University of Akron (4)
- Valparaiso University (4)
- Washington University in St. Louis (4)
- Florida International University College of Law (3)
- Pepperdine University (3)
- University of Colorado Law School (3)
- University of Georgia School of Law (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- SelectedWorks (2)
- St. John's University School of Law (2)
- St. Mary's University (2)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (2)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Publications (63)
- Villanova Law Review (45)
- Supreme Court Case Files (43)
- Scott Dodson (25)
- All Faculty Scholarship (20)
-
- Indiana Law Journal (15)
- William & Mary Law Review (14)
- South Carolina Law Review (13)
- Saint Louis University Law Journal (10)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (8)
- George D. Brown (8)
- West Virginia Law Review (7)
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Fordham Law Review (5)
- Journal Articles (5)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (4)
- Notre Dame Law Review (4)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (4)
- Articles & Chapters (3)
- Pepperdine Law Review (3)
- Scholarly Articles (3)
- Testimony (3)
- Valparaiso University Law Review (3)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (3)
- Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl (2)
- Akron Law Faculty Publications (2)
- Articles (2)
- Bernadette Bollas Genetin (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Frank Pommersheim (2)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 404
Full-Text Articles in Law
Manufacturing Sovereign State Mootness, Daniel Bruce
Manufacturing Sovereign State Mootness, Daniel Bruce
William & Mary Law Review
The idea that public defendants should receive any special treatment in the mootness context has been subject to intense criticism among commentators. Most notably, in the lead-up to the New York Rifle decision, Joseph Davis and Nicholas Reaves—two prominent First Amendment litigators from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty—urged the Supreme Court to take the opportunity to correct the lower courts’ practice of blessing government abuse of the voluntary cessation doctrine. Indeed, the Supreme Court has never adopted a presumption in favor of government defendants such as the one applied by the Seventh Circuit in Killeen, and it failed to …
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine Mims Crocker
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
Some scapegoats are innocent. Some warrant blame, but not the amount they are made to bear. Either way, scapegoating can allow in-groups to sidestep social problems by casting blame onto out-groups instead of confronting such problems--and the in-groups' complicity in perpetuating them--directly.
This Essay suggests that it may be productive to view the Bivens regime's rise as countering various exercises in scapegoating and its retrenchment as constituting an exercise in scapegoating. The earlier cases can be seen as responding to social structures that have scapegoated racial, economic, and other groups through overaggressive policing, mass incarceration, and inequitable government conduct more …
Who And What Is A City "For"? Municipal Associational Standing Reexamined, Kaitlin Ainsworth Caruso
Who And What Is A City "For"? Municipal Associational Standing Reexamined, Kaitlin Ainsworth Caruso
William & Mary Law Review Online
Cities nationwide increasingly engage in affirmative, plaintiff-side litigation to protect their residents. But despite this trend, standing remains a persistent challenge in municipal affirmative litigation—particularly in federal court, and particularly in impact litigation. I have previously proposed one way to give cities standing in federal court more in line with that of states, and with the role that cities play in their residents’ lives: extending to municipalities the doctrineof associational standing, which nonprofits and associations use to speak for their members in court. Recent works have both amplified and critiqued that initial proposal. With these additional considerations in hand, we …
The Paradox Of Exclusive State-Court Jurisdiction Over Federal Claims, Thomas B. Bennett
The Paradox Of Exclusive State-Court Jurisdiction Over Federal Claims, Thomas B. Bennett
Faculty Publications
Standing doctrine is supposed to ensure the separation of powers and an adversary process of adjudication. But recently, it has begun serving a new and unintended purpose: transferring federal claims from federal to state court. Paradoxically, current standing doctrine assigns a growing class of federal claims - despite Congressional intent to the contrary - to the exclusive jurisdiction of state courts. Even then, only in some states, and only to the extent authorized by state law.
This paradox arises at the intersection of three distinct areas of doctrine:
(1) a newly sharpened requirement of concrete injury under Article III that …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents and Special Thanks.
Reconstructing State Republics, Francesca L. Procaccini
Reconstructing State Republics, Francesca L. Procaccini
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Our national political dysfunction is rooted in constitutionally dysfunctional states. States today are devolving into modern aristocracies through laws that depress popular control, entwine wealth and power, and insulate incumbents from democratic oversight and accountability. These unrepublican states corrupt the entire United States. It is for this reason that the Constitution obligates the United States to restore ailing states to their full republican strength. But how? For all its attention to process, the Constitution is silent on how the United States may exercise its sweeping Article IV power to “guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of …
The Future Of Supreme Court Reform, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
The Future Of Supreme Court Reform, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
Scholarship@WashULaw
For a brief moment in the fall of 2020, structural reform of the Supreme Court seemed like a tangible possibility. After the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September, some prominent Democratic politicians and liberal commentators warmed to the idea of expanding the Court to respond to Republicans’ rush to confirm a nominee before the election, despite their refusal four years prior to confirm Judge Merrick Garland on the ground that it was an election year. Though Democratic candidate Joe Biden won the Presidency in November, Democrats lost seats in the House and have a majority in the Senate …
Bivens And The Ancien Régime, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Bivens And The Ancien Régime, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In its most recent decision narrowly construing Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, the Supreme Court derided Bivens as the product of an “‘ancien regime,’ ... [in which] the Court assumed it to be a proper judicial function to ‘provide such remedies as are necessary to make effective’ a statute’s purpose.” This Essay considers the relevance for Bivens claims of the Court’s shift to a nouveau régime to address the implication of private rights of action under statutes. It first describes and assesses the Court’s reasons for shifting to the nouveau r …
Habeas, History, And Hermeneutics, Jonathan R. Siegel
Habeas, History, And Hermeneutics, Jonathan R. Siegel
GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works
Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch recently proposed a radical shrinking of federal habeas corpus relief for state prisoners who are in custody pursuant to a final judgment of criminal conviction. They called for a return to the supposedly traditional principle that federal courts cannot grant habeas relief to such prisoners unless the state court that sentenced them lacked jurisdiction. This Article explains that (1) this supposedly traditional principle was not, in fact, a traditional principle of habeas, and (2) even if it were, Congress has displaced it by statute. Exploring the errors in the Justices’ arguments provides …
Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act Litigation In Federal Courts: Evaluating The Standing Doctrine In Privacy Contexts, Michael Mcmahon
Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act Litigation In Federal Courts: Evaluating The Standing Doctrine In Privacy Contexts, Michael Mcmahon
Saint Louis University Law Journal
Biometric technology, used to identify individuals based on their unchangeable and unique attributes such as fingerprints or facial geometry, has become commonplace in modern life. In Illinois, the use of biometric information by private organizations is regulated by the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act (“BIPA”), which came into effect in 2008 as the nation’s first state biometric information privacy statute. BIPA is unique in that it includes a private right of action and provides for recovery of liquidated damages where the statute is violated, which has resulted in plaintiffs bringing steadily increasing numbers of class-action suits under the law. This note …
Eager To Follow: Methodological Precedent In Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Eager To Follow: Methodological Precedent In Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
An important recent development in the field of statutory interpretation is the emergence of a movement calling for "methodological precedent"--a regime under which courts give precedential effect to interpretive methodology. In such a system, a case would establish not only what a particular statute means but could also establish binding rules of methodology--which tools are valid, in what order, and so on. The movement for methodological precedent has attracted sharp criticism on normative grounds. But both sides of the normative debate agree on the premise that the federal courts generally do not give precedential effect to interpretive methodology today.
This …
We Must Restore Americans' Faith In Our Federal Bench, A. Benjamin Spencer
We Must Restore Americans' Faith In Our Federal Bench, A. Benjamin Spencer
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
The Remand Power And The Supreme Court's Role, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
The Remand Power And The Supreme Court's Role, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
"Reversed and remanded." Or "vacated and remanded." These familiar words, often found at the end of an appellate decision, emphasize that an appellate court's conclusion that the lower court erred generally does not end the litigation. The power to remand for further proceedings rather than wrap up a case is useful for appellate courts because they may lack the institutional competence to bring the case to a final resolution (as when new factual findings are necessary) or lack an interest in the fact-specific work of applying a newly announced legal standard to the particular circumstances at hand. The modern Supreme …
Revisiting And Confronting The Federal Judiciary Capacity “Crisis”: Charting A Path For Federal Judiciary Reform, Ryan G. Vacca, Peter S. Menell
Revisiting And Confronting The Federal Judiciary Capacity “Crisis”: Charting A Path For Federal Judiciary Reform, Ryan G. Vacca, Peter S. Menell
Law Faculty Scholarship
[excerpt] "This Article revisits and confronts the growing caseload and congestion problems plaguing the federal judiciary. It begins by tracing the history and political economy surrounding judiciary reform. It then updates data on caseloads, processing times, certiorari petitions, en banc review, and other measures of judicial performance, revealing expanding caseloads and growing complexity and fragmentation of federal law. Part III explores the political, institutional, and human causes of the logjam over judiciary reform and offers an antidote: a commission tasked with developing a judiciary reform act that would not go into effect until 2030. The “2030 Commission” members would …
Judicial Credibility, Bert I. Huang
Judicial Credibility, Bert I. Huang
William & Mary Law Review
Do people believe a federal court when it rules against the government? And does such judicial credibility depend on the perceived political affiliation of the judge? This study presents a survey experiment addressing these questions, based on a set of recent cases in which both a judge appointed by President George W. Bush and a judge appointed by President Bill Clinton declared the same Trump Administration action to be unlawful. The findings offer evidence that, in a politically salient case, the partisan identification of the judge—here, as a “Bush judge” or “Clinton judge”—can influence the credibility of judicial review in …
The Judicial Reforms Of 1937, Barry Cushman
The Judicial Reforms Of 1937, Barry Cushman
William & Mary Law Review
The literature on reform of the federal courts in 1937 understandably focuses on the history and consequences of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ill-fated proposal to increase the membership of the Supreme Court. A series of decisions declaring various components of the New Deal unconstitutional had persuaded Roosevelt and some of his advisors that the best way out of the impasse was to enlarge the number of justiceships and to appoint to the new positions jurists who would be “dependable” supporters of the administration’s program. Yet Roosevelt and congressional Democrats also were deeply troubled by what they perceived as judicial obstruction …
First, We'll Neuter All The Judges, A. Benjamin Spencer
First, We'll Neuter All The Judges, A. Benjamin Spencer
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Concepts, Not Nomenclature: Universal Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, Opinions And Precedent, Howard Wasserman
Concepts, Not Nomenclature: Universal Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, Opinions And Precedent, Howard Wasserman
Faculty Publications
Battle lines are drawn on the permissibility and validity of injunctions in federal constitutional litigation purporting to halt government enforcement of a challenged law against all possible targets of that law and to protect all rights holders against enforcement. Courts, members of the Supreme Court, and legal scholars are divided — some supporting and others rejecting them as impermissible.; I have staked my position in the latter camp.
From that starting point, this paper considers three subsidiary issues: 1) the proper label for these injunctions, arguing that “universal” or “non-particularized” is a more accurate term than the prevailing “nationwide”; 2) …
The Judicial Reforms Of 1937, Barry Cushman
The Judicial Reforms Of 1937, Barry Cushman
Journal Articles
The literature on reform of the federal courts in 1937 understandably focuses on the history and consequences of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ill-fated proposal to increase the membership of the Supreme Court. A series of decisions declaring various components of the New Deal unconstitutional had persuaded Roosevelt and some of his advisors that the best way out of the impasse was to enlarge the number of justiceships and to appoint to the new positions jurists who would be “dependable” supporters of the Administration’s program. Yet Roosevelt and congressional Democrats also were deeply troubled by what they perceived as judicial obstruction …
Concepts, Not Nomenclature: Universal Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, Opinions, And Precedent, Howard M. Wasserman
Concepts, Not Nomenclature: Universal Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, Opinions, And Precedent, Howard M. Wasserman
University of Colorado Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reverse Advisory Opinions, Neal Devins, Saikrishna B. Prakash
Reverse Advisory Opinions, Neal Devins, Saikrishna B. Prakash
Neal E. Devins
No abstract provided.
The Ultimate Independence Of The Federal Courts: Defying The Supreme Court In The Exercise Of Federal Common Law Powers, Ronald H. Rosenberg
The Ultimate Independence Of The Federal Courts: Defying The Supreme Court In The Exercise Of Federal Common Law Powers, Ronald H. Rosenberg
Ronald H. Rosenberg
No abstract provided.
An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker
An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker
Katherine Mims Crocker
Again and again in regard to recent high-profile disputes, the legal community has tied itself in knots over questions about when state plaintiffs should have standing to sue in federal court, especially in cases where they seek to sue federal-government defendants. Lawsuits challenging everything from the Bush administration’s environmental policies to the Obama administration’s immigration actions to the Trump administration’s travel bans have become mired in tricky and technical questions about whether state plaintiffs belonged in federal court.
Should state standing cause so much controversy and confusion? This Essay argues that state plaintiffs are far more like at least one …
Against Methodological Stare Decisis, Evan J. Criddle, Glen Staszewski
Against Methodological Stare Decisis, Evan J. Criddle, Glen Staszewski
Evan J. Criddle
Should federal courts give stare decisis effect to statutory interpretation methodology? Although a growing number of legal scholars have answered this question in the affirmative, this Essay makes the case against methodological stare decisis. Drawing on recent empirical studies of Congress’s expectations regarding statutory interpretation, we show that existing knowledge of Congress’s expectations is insufficient to settle on one consistent approach to statutory interpretation. Moreover, Congress has almost certainly changed its expectations over time, and this raises serious problems for methodological stare decisis from the perspective of faithful-agency theories. We argue further that many theories and doctrines of statutory interpretation …
Circumventing Congress: How The Federal Courts Opened The Door To Impeaching Criminal Defendants With Prior Convictions, Jeffrey Bellin
Circumventing Congress: How The Federal Courts Opened The Door To Impeaching Criminal Defendants With Prior Convictions, Jeffrey Bellin
Jeffrey Bellin
This Article spotlights the flawed analytical framework at the heart of the federal courts’ approach to one of the most controversial trial practices in American criminal jurisprudence — the admission of prior convictions to impeach the credibility of defendants who testify. As the Article explains, the flawed approach is a byproduct of the courts’ reliance on a five-factor analytical framework to implement the governing legal standard enacted by Congress in Federal Rule of Evidence 609. Tracing the evolution of the fivefactor framework from its roots in pre-Rule 609 case law, the Article demonstrates that the courts’ reinterpretation of the framework …
One Good Plaintiff Is Not Enough, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
One Good Plaintiff Is Not Enough, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
This Article concerns an aspect of Article III standing that has played a role in many of the highest-profile controversies of recent years, including litigation over the Affordable Care Act, immigration policy, and climate change. Although the federal courts constantly emphasize the importance of ensuring that only proper plaintiffs invoke the federal judicial power, the Supreme Court and other federal courts have developed a significant exception to the usual requirement of standing. This exception holds that a court entertaining a multiple-plaintiff case may dispense with inquiring into the standing of each plaintiff as long as the court finds that one …
Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
The Federal Courts’ Rulemaking Buffer, Jordan M. Singer
The Federal Courts’ Rulemaking Buffer, Jordan M. Singer
William & Mary Law Review
Procedural rulemaking is often thought of as a second-order task for the federal court system, relevant to the courts’ work but not essential to their function. In reality, rulemaking plays an integral role in the court system’s operation by actively insulating the courts from environmental pressure. This Article explains how power over procedural rulemaking protects the federal courts from environmental uncertainty and describes the court system’s efforts to maintain the effectiveness of the rulemaking buffer in response to historical and contemporary challenges.
Standing For Nothing, Robert Mikos
Standing For Nothing, Robert Mikos
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
A growing number of courts and commentators have suggested that states have Article III standing to protect state law. Proponents of such "protective" standing argue that states must be given access to federal court whenever their laws are threatened. Absent such access, they claim, many state laws might prove toothless, thereby undermining the value of the states in our federal system. Furthermore, proponents insist that this form of special solicitude is very limited-that it opens the doors to the federal courthouses a crack but does not swing them wide open. This Essay, however, contests both of these claims, and thus, …
An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker
An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
Again and again in regard to recent high-profile disputes, the legal community has tied itself in knots over questions about when state plaintiffs should have standing to sue in federal court, especially in cases where they seek to sue federal-government defendants. Lawsuits challenging everything from the Bush administration’s environmental policies to the Obama administration’s immigration actions to the Trump administration’s travel bans have become mired in tricky and technical questions about whether state plaintiffs belonged in federal court.
Should state standing cause so much controversy and confusion? This Essay argues that state plaintiffs are far more like at least one …