Jurisprudence Commons^™

Methods Of Extracting Opinions From Shari'a Texts, Saadedin Dedache

UAEU Law Journal

The search deals with the topic of how to conclude opinions from Islamic provisions (Istidlal), in particular, its concept, types, approach of scholars towards it, its fields, its role with respect to the interpretation of the Islamic provisions and its consequences in Islamic legislation.

It deals as well with the different typs of opinion of prophet's comp gains, their followers and people came after, who set standards for the accepted opinion.

The search concerns with a very controversial issue, I.E.

The relationship between opinion and Ijtihad, with providing some examples for some scholar's efforts and how the formers made their …

Ambiguous ( ) Views And Opinions Of The Four Imams In Issues Of The Fundamentals Of Jurisprudence, Ahmed Abdullah Al-Dweihi

UAEU Law Journal

The research study aims to clarify the most important ambiguous views and opinions of the four imams (Abu Hanifa, Malik, Al-Shafie and Ahmed) in relation to fundamentalist jurisprudence issues by tracing the attribution of that view or opinion to the Imam to demonstrate the aspects of ambiguity in them, and the most important interpretations, which scholars said of that view or opinion, in addition to explaining the chosen opinion. There is no doubt that demonstrating the Imam's intent of the expressions that provoke argument among scholars will contribute to the defense of the Imam against any attempts of tarnishing his …

When Judges Have Reasons Not To Give Reasons: A Comparative Law Approach, Mathilde Cohen

Mathilde Cohen

Law Clerks And The Institutional Design Of The Federal Judiciary, Albert Yoon

Marquette Law Review

This Essay highlights the evolving institutional changes in the federal judiciary—a protracted confirmation process, higher caseload demands, and declining real salaries—in concurrence with evidence suggesting greater reliance by judges on their law clerks when writing opinions. These dynamic forces arguably undermine the integrity of the judicial process and counsel for legislative action to address judicial working conditions or for changes by judges in the hiring of law clerks.

A Barometer Of Freedom Of The Press: The Opinions Of Mr. Justice White , Michael J. Armstrong

Pepperdine Law Review

Since the Zurcher v. Stanford Daily decision which was authored by Justice Byron F. White, the news media has become increasingly concerned with its' first amendment protections from governmental searches. Since Justice White has been the voice of the United States Supreme Court on this very issue, the author submits that an examination of Justice White's media related opinions can serve as a "barometer" for the constitutional protections of the news media. The author examines the use of Justice White to the Supreme Court, his staunch adherence to stare decisis, and the historical foundation of the first amendment as they …

Religion And First Amendment Prosecutions: An Analysis Of Justice Black's Constitutional Interpretation, Constance Mauney

Pepperdine Law Review

Justice Hugo L. Black served on the United States Supreme Court over a period of thirty-four years, encompassing Supreme Court terms from 1937 to 1971. During this period, the subject of the constitutional limitations of the freedom of religion was increasingly subjected to intense social pressures. Justice Black figured prominently in the development of constitutional law as the Supreme Court attempted to give meaning to the establishment and free exercise clause of the first amendment. He wrote the majority opinions which dealt with the establishment clause in the Everson, McCulloin, Engel and Torcaso cases. Yet, on later occasions, Justice Black …

Lewis F. Powell Lecture, Carter G. Phillips

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Sociological Legitimacy" In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael L. Wells

Washington and Lee Law Review

Analysis of a Supreme Court opinion ordinarily begins from the premise that the opinion is a transparent window into the Court's thinking, such that the reasons offered by the Court are, or ought to be, the reasons that account for the holding. Scholars debate the strength of the Court's reasoning, question or defend the Court's candor, and propose alternative ways of justifying the ruling. This Article takes issue with the transparency premise, on both descriptive and normative grounds. Especially in controversial cases, the Court is at least as much concerned with presenting its holding in a way that will win …

Fourth Circuit Publication Practices, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judges As Trustees: A Duty To Account And An Opportunity For Virtue, Sarah M. R. Cravens

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Personality: Rhetoric And Emotion In Supreme Court Opinions, Laura Krugman Ray

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abrams V. United States: Remembering The Authors Of Both Opinions, James F. Fagan Jr.

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

"I Vote This Way Because I'M Wrong": The Supreme Court Justice As Epimenides, John M. Rogers

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Possibly the most unsettling phenomenon in the Supreme Court's 1988 term was Justice White's decision to vote contrary to his own exhaustively stated reasoning in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. His unexplained decision to vote against the result of his own analysis lends support to those who argue that law, or at least constitutional law, is fundamentally indeterminate. Proponents of the indeterminacy argument sometimes base their position on the allegedly inescapable inconsistency of decisions made by a multi-member court. There is an answer to the inconsistency argument, but it founders if justices sometimes vote, without explanation, on the basis of …

The Case Method Of Studying Law, Henry Rottschaefer

Michigan Law Review

A review of THE CASE METHOD OF STUDYING LAW By Jacob Henry Landman.