Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Access to court (1)
- Attorney’s fees (1)
- Circuit courts (1)
- Civil litigation (1)
- Civil rights (1)
-
- Complex litigation (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Empirical studies (1)
- Enforcement powers (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Federal judges (1)
- Federal litigation. (1)
- Fee shifting (1)
- Gender & race (1)
- Ideology (1)
- Iqbal (1)
- Judicial diversity & behavior (1)
- Motions to dismiss (1)
- Panel effects (1)
- Political affiliation (1)
- Political parties (1)
- Private enforcement regimes (1)
- Regulatory laws (1)
- Regulatory legislation (1)
- Rule 12(b)(6) (1)
- Statutory implementation (1)
- Twombly (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Civil Rights and Discrimination
Politics, Identity, And Pleading Decisions On The U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
Politics, Identity, And Pleading Decisions On The U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
All Faculty Scholarship
We report the results of an empirical study of appeals from rulings on motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) after the Supreme Court’s decisions in Twombly and Iqbal. We first describe the role that pleading was intended to play in the original (1938) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, review the Court’s decisions in Twombly and Iqbal, and offer a brief discussion of common themes in normative scholarship that is critical of Twombly and Iqbal, including the claim that they threaten to amplify ideological and subjective decision-making, particularly …
A New (Republican) Litigation State?, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
A New (Republican) Litigation State?, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
All Faculty Scholarship
It is a commonplace in American politics that Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to favor access to courts to enforce individual rights with lawsuits. In this article we show that conventional wisdom, long true, no longer reflects party agendas in Congress. We report the results of an empirical examination of bills containing private rights of action with pro-plaintiff fee-shifting provisions that were introduced in Congress from 1989 through 2018. The last eight years of our data document escalating Republican-party support for proposals to create individual rights enforceable by private lawsuits, mobilized with attorney’s fee awards. By 2015-18, there …