Judges Commons^™

The Rise Of Transnational Commercial Courts: The Astana International Financial Centre Court, Ilias Bantekas

Pace International Law Review

The proliferation of international commercial courts aims to boost income from legal services and serve as a catalyst for newly found rules of law and thus attract investor confidence. The latter is the underlying purpose for the creation of the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) and its Court. The Court’s legal framework is set out in the tradition of its competitors in the Gulf and similarly employs an impressive lineup of former senior judges from the United Kingdom. It is a unique experiment because it strives to create a balance between maintaining a judicial institution of the highest caliber ...

Law School News: 'Unmatched Opportunities' 12-16-2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Law School News: Mike Andrews '97 Nominated To U.S. Court Of Federal Claims 12-15-2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Surprising Views Of Montesquieu And Tocqueville About Juries: Juries Empower Judges, Renée Lettow Lerner

Louisiana Law Review

Both Montesquieu and Tocqueville thought that an independent judiciary was key to maintaining a moderate government of ordered liberty. But judicial power should not be exercised too openly, or the people would view judges as tyrannical. In Montesquieu's and Tocqueville's view, the jury was an excellent mask for the power of judges. Both Montesquieu and Tocqueville thought that popular juries had many weaknesses in deciding cases. But, as Tocqueville made clear, the firm guidance of the judge in instructions on law and comments on evidence could prevent juries from going astray and make the institution a "free school ...

Law School News: Two Rwu Law Alumni Included Among Historic Judicial Nominations 12-08-2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of The Competing Views On The Interpretation Of The U.S. Constitution, Joseph Longo

Senior Honors Theses

This thesis will examine the competing interpretations of the United States Constitution and the different effects these interpretations would have on the American government and legal systems. By examining legal precedents and different philosophical views, the varying interpretations will be examined and put through real-world scenarios. The founding of America was over 200 years ago, but philosophical views throughout history shall be used in the understanding of the different interpretations and real-world consequences. The thesis will not claim that one interpretation is proper and the perfect one for the United States, rather it will challenge each view in an attempt ...

Law School News: Rwu Law Announces Rbg Contest For K-12 Students 12-2-2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Statewide Judicial Emergency: Judicial Order By The Supreme Court Of Georgia Declaring A Statewide Judicial Emergency, Stephanie J. Remy, Brittiny K. Slicker

Georgia State University Law Review

The Supreme Court of Georgia issued an Order declaring a Statewide Judicial Emergency to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 throughout the State of Georgia. The courts remained open to address essential functions, as defined within the Order. Additionally, all deadlines and other filing requirements were extended or tolled. Throughout the counties in Georgia, different courts released Orders outlining how they would follow the Judicial Emergency Order from the Supreme Court of Georgia. The Judicial Emergency Order had been extended four times as of August 1, 2020.

Crimes And Offenses: Proposed Constitutional Carry Act Of 2019 & Executive Order By The Governor Temporarily Extending Renewal Requirements For Weapons Carry Licenses, Kristin Harripaul, Briana A. James

Georgia State University Law Review

In March 2020, Governor Brian Kemp (R) issued an Executive Order declaring a Public Health State of Emergency due to COVID-19. The Supreme Court of Georgia also issued a Judicial Order declaring a Statewide Judicial Emergency. The Council of Probate Court Judges subsequently characterized the processing of weapons carry licenses as non-essential and temporarily suspended license issuances to limit the spread of COVID-19. HB 2 would have eliminated the license requirement and the need for probate judges to process applications. However, HB 2 never received a hearing before the 2019–20 legislative session ended. Gun rights advocates called on Governor ...

To Cite Or Not To Cite: Is That Still A Question, Deborah L. Heller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Some states still restrict the citation of unpublished opinions, and the rules among the federal circuits vary slightly as well. This article looks at the history of case publication, the controversy over unpublished opinions, and the current rules related to the citation of unpublished cases.

Rwu Law News: The Newsletter Of Roger Williams University School Of Law 12-2020, Barry Bridges, Michael M. Bowden, Nicole Dyszlewski, Louisa Fredey

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

An Unfair Cross Section: Federal Jurisdiction For Indian Country Crimes Dismantles Jury Community Conscience, Alana Paris

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, federal jury pools must reflect a fair cross section of the community in which a crime is prosecuted and from which no distinct group in the community is excluded. The community in which a crime is prosecuted varies widely in Indian country based on legislative reforms enacted by Congress to strip indigenous populations of their inherent sovereignty. Under the Major Crimes Act, the federal government has the right to adjudicate all serious crimes committed by one American Indian against another American Indian or non-Indian within Indian country. American Indian defendants under ...

The Ambiguity And Unfairness Of Dismissing Bad Writing, Benjamin D. Raker

Cleveland State Law Review

Courts routinely choose to explicitly dismiss arguments and issues raised by parties, regardless of their merit, based on unexplained determinations that the briefing was bad. This practice, which I call abandonment by poor presentation, is sometimes justified by practicality, by pointing to federal and local rules, by waiver and forfeiture doctrines, and by the norm of party presentation. None of these justifications hold water. I contend that the real reason judges find abandonment by poor presentation is agenda control: judges rely on the practice as a means of retaining control over how they decide cases. This unexplained, poorly justified, and ...

Law School News: 'Law Isn't A Foreign Language Anymore' 11/24/2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

We Must Restore Americans' Faith In Our Federal Bench, A. Benjamin Spencer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Shinall, David L. (Sc 3572), Manuscripts & Folklife Archives

MSS Finding Aids

Finding aid only for Manuscripts Small Collection 3572. Taped interviews by David Shinall, a reporter for WKU’s College Heights Herald, with justices of the Kentucky Supreme Court, made prior to a session of the court held on WKU’s campus on 18 April 2002.

Avoiding Judicial Discipline, Veronica Root Martinez

Northwestern University Law Review

Over the past several years, several high-profile complaints have been levied against Article III judges alleging improper conduct. Many of these complaints, however, were dismissed without investigation after the judge in question removed themselves from the jurisdiction of the circuit’s judicial council—oftentimes through retirement and once through elevation to the Supreme Court. When judges—the literal arbiters of justice within American society—are able to elude oversight of their own potential misconduct, it puts the legitimacy of the judiciary and the rule of law in jeopardy.

This Essay argues that it is imperative that mechanisms are adopted that ...

Savenda Management Services Limited V Stanbic Bank Zambia Limited & Gregory Chifire (Alleged Contemnor) (Appeal No. 37/2017) [2018] Zmsc 11, Mwami Kabwabwa

SAIPAR Case Review

Adjudicators have a social responsibility. When the Judiciary/judges carry out their constitutional mandate of dispensing justice it is critical to bear in mind that judges carry a level of responsibility for the impact that their decisions have on society. For this reason, judges ought to be held responsible for every judgment they render either good or bad. Contempt is an exceedingly powerful instrument in the hands of the courts to tame the conduct and behaviour of lawyers and lay people who come into contact with judicial authority. Like any other power, the exercise of contempt power has to be ...

Politics, Identity, And Class Certification On The U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang

Michigan Law Review

This Article draws on novel data and presents the results of the first empirical analysis of how potentially salient characteristics of Court of Appeals judges influence class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We find that the ideological composition of the panel (measured by the party of the appointing president) has a very strong association with certification outcomes, with all-Democratic panels having dramatically higher rates of procertification outcomes than all-Republican panels—nearly triple in about the past twenty years. We also find that the presence of one African American on a panel, and the presence ...

Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

This essay posits that Justice Sotomayor is the Court’s chief defender of the Fourth Amendment and the cherished values it protects. She has consistently defended Fourth Amendment freedoms—in majority, concurring, and especially in dissenting opinions. Part I recounts a few of her majority opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. Part II examines her concurring opinion in United States v. Jones. Part III examines several of her dissenting opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. A review of these opinions demonstrates what should be clear to any observer of the Supreme Court: Justice Sotomayor consistently defends Fourth Amendment principles and values.