Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Law and Society (3)
- Law and Race (2)
- Legal Remedies (2)
- Civil Procedure (1)
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Courts (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (1)
- Election Law (1)
- Evidence (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Judges (1)
- Law and Philosophy (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Legal Studies (1)
- Legal Theory (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Torts (1)
- Institution
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
What Will We Lose If The Trial Vanishes?, Robert P. Burns
What Will We Lose If The Trial Vanishes?, Robert P. Burns
Faculty Working Papers
The number of trials continues to decline andfederal civil trials have almost completely disappeared. This essay attempts to address the significance of this loss, to answer the obvious question, "So what?" It argues against taking a resigned or complacent attitude toward an important problem for our public culture. It presents a short description of the trial's internal structure, recounts different sorts of explanations, and offers an inventory of the kinds of wounds this development would inflict.
Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert Tsai, Nelson Tebbe
Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert Tsai, Nelson Tebbe
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
his is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.
Justice Stevens And The Obligations Of Judgment, David Pozen
Justice Stevens And The Obligations Of Judgment, David Pozen
Faculty Scholarship
How to sum up a corpus of opinions that spans dozens of legal fields and four decades on the bench? How to make the most sense of a jurisprudence that has always been resistant to classification, by a jurist widely believed to have "no discernible judicial philosophy"? These questions have stirred Justice Stevens' former clerks in recent months. Since his retirement, many of us have been trying to capture in some meaningful if partial way what we found vital and praiseworthy in his approach to the law. There may be something paradoxical about the attempt to encapsulate in a formula …
Documentary Disenfranchisement, Jessie Allen
Documentary Disenfranchisement, Jessie Allen
Articles
In the generally accepted picture of criminal disenfranchisement in the United States today, permanent voting bans are rare. Laws on the books in most states now provide that people with criminal convictions regain their voting rights after serving their sentences. This Article argues that the legal reality may be significantly different. Interviews conducted with county election officials in New York suggest that administrative practices sometimes transform temporary voting bans into lifelong disenfranchisement. Such de facto permanent disenfranchisement has significant political, legal, and cultural implications. Politically, it undermines the comforting story that states’ legislative reforms have ameliorated the antidemocratic interaction of …
Affirmative Action As Government Speech, William M. Carter Jr.
Affirmative Action As Government Speech, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
This article seeks to transform how we think about “affirmative action.” The Supreme Court’s affirmative action jurisprudence appears to be a seamless whole, but closer examination reveals important differences. Government race-consciousness sometimes grants a benefit to members of a minority group for remedial or diversifying purposes. But the government may also undertake remedial or diversifying race-conscious action without it resulting in unequal treatment or disadvantage to non-minorities. Under the Court’s current equal protection doctrine, both categories of cases are treated as presumptively unconstitutional. Race-consciousness itself has become a constitutional harm, regardless of tangible effects.
Prior scholarship has suggested that the …