Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (2)
- Federal courts (2)
- Article III (1)
- Atkins v. Virginia (1)
- Authority (1)
-
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Capacity for change (1)
- Chancery (1)
- Corrigibility (1)
- Court of Appeals (1)
- Court of Common Pleas (1)
- Crown prosecutors (1)
- Cruel and unusual punishment (1)
- Death penalty (1)
- Disciplinary proceedings (1)
- Disciplinary proceedings involving Crown prosecutors and government lawyers (1)
- Dora W. Klein (1)
- Dorie Klein (1)
- Eighth Amendment (1)
- Exchequer (1)
- Extraprofessional misconduct (1)
- Founders (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Government lawyers (1)
- Intellectually disabled (1)
- Judicial decisionmaking (1)
- Judicial norms (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Justiciability (1)
- Juvenile offenders (1)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Historical Kinship And Categorical Mischief: The Use And Misuse Of Doctrinal Borrowing In Intellectual Property Law, Mark Bartholomew, John Tehranian
Historical Kinship And Categorical Mischief: The Use And Misuse Of Doctrinal Borrowing In Intellectual Property Law, Mark Bartholomew, John Tehranian
Journal Articles
Analogies are ubiquitous in legal reasoning, and, in copyright jurisprudence, courts frequently turn to patent law for guidance. From introducing doctrines meant to regulate online intermediaries to evaluating the constitutionality of resurrecting copyrights to works from the public domain, judges turn to patent law analogies to lend ballast to their decisions. At other times, however, patent analogies with copyright law are quickly discarded and differences between the two regimes highlighted. Why? In examining the transplantation of doctrinal frameworks from one intellectual property field to another, this Article assesses the circumstances in which courts engage in doctrinal borrowing, discerns their rationale …
Twenty Years After Krieger V Law Society Of Alberta: Law Society Discipline Of Crown Prosecutors And Government Lawyers, Andrew Flavelle Martin
Twenty Years After Krieger V Law Society Of Alberta: Law Society Discipline Of Crown Prosecutors And Government Lawyers, Andrew Flavelle Martin
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Krieger v. Law Society of Alberta held that provincial and territorial law societies have disciplinary jurisdiction over Crown prosecutors for conduct outside of prosecutorial discretion. The reasoning in Krieger would also apply to government lawyers. The apparent consensus is that law societies rarely exercise that jurisdiction. But in those rare instances, what conduct do Canadian law societies discipline Crown prosecutors and government lawyers for? In this article, I canvass reported disciplinary decisions to demonstrate that, while law societies sometimes discipline Crown prosecutors for violations unique to those lawyers, they often do so for violations applicable to all lawyers — particularly …
Legal Clutter: How Concurring Opinions Create Unnecessary Confusion And Encourage Litigation, Meg Penrose
Legal Clutter: How Concurring Opinions Create Unnecessary Confusion And Encourage Litigation, Meg Penrose
Faculty Scholarship
Good judges are clear writers. And clear writers avoid legal clutter. Legal clutter occurs when judges publish multiple individually written opinions that are neither useful nor necessary. This essay argues that concurring opinions are the worst form of legal clutter. Unlike majority opinions, concurring opinions are legal asides, musings of sorts—often by a single judge—that add length and confusion to an opinion often without adding meaningful value. Concurring opinions do not change the outcome of a case. Unlike dissenting opinions, they do not claim disagreement with the ultimate decision. Instead, concurring opinions merely offer an idea or viewpoint that failed …
Let The Right Ones In: The Supreme Court's Changing Approach To Justiciability, Richard L. Heppner
Let The Right Ones In: The Supreme Court's Changing Approach To Justiciability, Richard L. Heppner
Law Faculty Publications
The power of federal courts to act is circumscribed not only by the limits of subject matter jurisdiction, but also by various justiciability doctrines. Article III of the Constitution vests the judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court and such inferior courts as Congress creates. That power is limited to deciding cases and controversies. It does not permit federal courts to provide advisory opinions when there is not a real dispute between the parties. Based on that constitutional limit, and related prudential concerns, the Court has developed a variety of justiciability requirements limiting which cases can be …
The Constitution As A Source Of Remedial Law, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
The Constitution As A Source Of Remedial Law, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In Equity’s Constitutional Source, Owen W. Gallogly argues that Article III is the source of a constitutional default rule for equitable remedies—specifically, that Article III’s vesting of the “judicial Power” “in Equity” empowers federal courts to afford the remedies traditionally afforded by the English Court of Chancery at the time of the Founding, and to develop such remedies in an incremental fashion. This Response questions the current plausibility of locating such a default rule in Article III, since remedies having their source in Article III would be available in federal but not state courts and would apply to state-law …
James Ravenscroft's Reports Of Cases In The Court Of Common Pleas (1623-1633), William Hamilton Bryson
James Ravenscroft's Reports Of Cases In The Court Of Common Pleas (1623-1633), William Hamilton Bryson
Law Faculty Publications
James Ravenscroft was born in 1595, the son of Thomas Ravenscroft of Fould Park, Middlesex, and Bridget Powell. The Ravenscrofts were an ancient Flintshire family. (Thomas Ravenscroft (1563-1631) was a cousin of Lord Ellesmere's first wife, a member of Parliament in 1621, and a Cursitor in the Chancery.) James was admitted at Jesus College, Cambridge, in 1613, and received his B.A. degree in 1616. He was admitted to the Inner Temple on 29 May 1617, and he was called to the bar on 21 May 1626. James was married to Mary Peck; they resided in High Holborn, and had eleven …
Witness Hide-And-Seek: Why Federal Prosecutors Should Record Pretrial Interviews, Christina Frohock, Jeffrey E. Marcus
Witness Hide-And-Seek: Why Federal Prosecutors Should Record Pretrial Interviews, Christina Frohock, Jeffrey E. Marcus
Articles
This Article pays long-overdue attention to a federal appellate court's warning against "playing hide-and-seek" with witnesses. Specifically, prosecutors should record interviews. While courtroom cameras dominate the topic of judicial transparency, cameras can play a critical role in a sleepier corner of criminal proceedings: pretrial witness interviews. The Article first tracks the history of open judicial proceedings as a tradition of our Anglo- American jurisprudence. Next, the Article identifies the normative thread running through that history. Fairness may suffer when cameras transform public proceedings into publicized proceedings. Finally, the Article argues that this same issue of fairness applies to pretrial witness …
The Fourth Amendment's Constitutional Home, Gerald S. Dickinson
The Fourth Amendment's Constitutional Home, Gerald S. Dickinson
Articles
The home enjoys omnipresent status in American constitutional law. The Bill of Rights, peculiarly, has served as the central refuge for special protections to the home. This constitutional sanctuary has elicited an intriguing textual and doctrinal puzzle. A distinct thread has emerged that runs through the first five amendments delineating the home as a zone where rights emanating from speech, smut, gods, guns, soldiers, searches, sex, and self-incrimination enjoy special protections. However, the thread inexplicably unravels upon arriving at takings. There, the constitutional text omits and the Supreme Court’s doctrine excludes a special zone of safeguards to the home. This …
Problems With Authority, Amy J. Griffin
Problems With Authority, Amy J. Griffin
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Judicial decisionmaking rests on a foundation of unwritten rules—those that govern the weight of authority. Such rules, including the cornerstone principle of stare decisis, are created informally through the internal social practices of the judiciary. Despite the central role of such rules in judicial decisionmaking, we lack a good account of how they are created, revised, and enforced. There is something paradoxical and troubling about the notion that the rules of the game are determined by the players as they play the game according to those rules. Because weight-of-authority rules are largely informal and almost entirely unwritten, we don’t even …
Taking Corrigibility Seriously, Dora Klein
Taking Corrigibility Seriously, Dora Klein
Faculty Articles
This article argues that the Supreme Court's creation of a category of "irreparably corrupt" juveniles is not only an epistemological mistake but also a tactical mistake which has undermined the Court's express desire that only in the "rarest" of cases will juveniles be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.