Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Judges Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

6,561 Full-Text Articles 4,298 Authors 1,845,133 Downloads 171 Institutions

All Articles in Judges

Faceted Search

6,561 full-text articles. Page 6 of 167.

Law School News: Judge Rogeriee Thompson, Legal Pioneer Dorothy Crockett Among Influential "Women Of The Century" 08/19/2020, Eryn Dion, Roger Williams University School of Law 2020 Gannett New England

Law School News: Judge Rogeriee Thompson, Legal Pioneer Dorothy Crockett Among Influential "Women Of The Century" 08/19/2020, Eryn Dion, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.


Jewish Law Perspectives On Judicial Settlement Practice, Shlomo Pill 2020 Pepperdine University

Jewish Law Perspectives On Judicial Settlement Practice, Shlomo Pill

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The classic adjudicatory paradigm of opposing attorneys facing off at trial before a judge and jury in order to receive a favorable judgment is an image long past. Increased litigation volume, and the added time and expense of modern litigation has resulted in a rich practice of judges working to broker settlements between litigants in lieu of formal adjudication. Judicial settlement is the subject of much debate, however, and the diverse range of judicial practice in this area reflects the institutional, ethical, and jurisprudential uncertainties we still have regarding the propriety of judges facilitating settlements. This paper offers a new ...


Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin 2020 Pepperdine University

Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin

Pepperdine Law Review

Neither electoral politics, norms preservation, nor modest good government reform can restore the political system because they cannot mitigate the primary threat to the American democracy, Republican radicalism. Those who believe otherwise fail to appreciate how and why radicalism will continue to impede democratic restoration regardless of what happens at the ballot box, misdiagnose the underlying factors that produce and sustain GOP radicalism, and under-estimate the degree of democratic deterioration that has already taken place. Republicans do not need to prevail in every election to forestall the restoration of democracy or to prevent Democrats from governing. The only viable path ...


A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz 2020 Pepperdine University

A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz

Pepperdine Law Review

A Court-packing proposal is imminent. Mainstream Democratic Party Presidential Candidates are already supporting it. The number of Justices on the Supreme Court has been set at nine since 1869, but this is merely a statutory requirement. As soon as Democrats regain control of the Presidency and the Congress, Court-packing will be on the agenda, either expressly or under the guise of Court-reform. Now is the time for the American legal academy to join together to oppose this threat. Court-packing would threaten democracy, destroy the rule of law and undermine judicial independence. It is a pointless and unnecessary reaction born of ...


Revisiting And Confronting The Federal Judiciary Capacity “Crisis”: Charting A Path For Federal Judiciary Reform, Ryan G. Vacca, Peter S. Menell 2020 University of New Hampshire School of Law

Revisiting And Confronting The Federal Judiciary Capacity “Crisis”: Charting A Path For Federal Judiciary Reform, Ryan G. Vacca, Peter S. Menell

Law Faculty Scholarship

[excerpt] "This Article revisits and confronts the growing caseload and congestion problems plaguing the federal judiciary. It begins by tracing the history and political economy surrounding judiciary reform. It then updates data on caseloads, processing times, certiorari petitions, en banc review, and other measures of judicial performance, revealing expanding caseloads and growing complexity and fragmentation of federal law. Part III explores the political, institutional, and human causes of the logjam over judiciary reform and offers an antidote: a commission tasked with developing a judiciary reform act that would not go into effect until 2030. The “2030 Commission” members would not ...


History Of The First Women Project, Nicole P. Dyszlewski 2020 Roger Williams University School of Law Library

History Of The First Women Project, Nicole P. Dyszlewski

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Boldly Marching Through Closed Doors: The Experiences Of The Earliest Female Attorneys In Their Own Words, Nicole P. Dyszlewski 2020 Roger Williams University School of Law Library

Boldly Marching Through Closed Doors: The Experiences Of The Earliest Female Attorneys In Their Own Words, Nicole P. Dyszlewski

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Should Judges Have A Duty Of Tech Competence?, John G. Browning 2020 Spencer Fane LLP

Should Judges Have A Duty Of Tech Competence?, John G. Browning

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

In an era in which lawyers are increasingly held to a higher standard of “tech competence” in their representation of clients, shouldn’t we similarly require judges to be conversant in relevant technology? Using real world examples of judicial missteps with or refusal to use technology, and drawn from actual cases and judicial disciplinary proceedings, this Article argues that in today’s Digital Age, judicial technological competence is necessary. At a time when courts themselves have proven vulnerable to cyberattacks, and when courts routinely tackle technology related issues like data privacy and the admissibility of digital evidence, Luddite judges are ...


The Kavanaugh Court And The Schechter-To-Chevron Spectrum: How The New Supreme Court Will Make The Administrative State More Democratically Accountable, Justin Walker 2020 University of Louisville School of Law

The Kavanaugh Court And The Schechter-To-Chevron Spectrum: How The New Supreme Court Will Make The Administrative State More Democratically Accountable, Justin Walker

Indiana Law Journal

In a typical year, Congress passes roughly 800 pages of law—that’s about a seveninch

stack of paper. But in the same year, federal administrative agencies promulgate

80,000 pages of regulations—which makes an eleven-foot paper pillar. This move

toward electorally unaccountable administrators deciding federal policy began in

1935, accelerated in the 1940s, and has peaked in the recent decades. Rather than

elected representatives, unelected bureaucrats increasingly make the vast majority

of the nation’s laws—a trend facilitated by the Supreme Court’s decisions in three

areas: delegation, deference, and independence.

This trend is about to be ...


Judicial Independence: Tweak The Guiding Paradigm, Charles G. Geyh 2020 Indiana University Maurer School of Law

Judicial Independence: Tweak The Guiding Paradigm, Charles G. Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Over time, the public has simply ceased to believe judges when say that they follow the law, and nothing but. If judges impose their ideological policy preferences, the argument goes, why should they be independent from political controls, when other policymakers are not? We have reached the point where, when judges seek to defend the customs and conventions that have guarded against incursions upon their independence by arguing that “we are all about the law and nothing else,” the public response has increasingly become, “No, no, no, your nose is growing.”


Chevron As Construction, Lawrence B. Solum, Cass R. Sunstein 2020 Georgetown University Law Center

Chevron As Construction, Lawrence B. Solum, Cass R. Sunstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 1984, the Supreme Court declared that courts should uphold agency interpretations of ambiguous statutory provisions, so long as those interpretations are reasonable. The Chevron framework, as it is called, is now under serious pressure. Current debates can be both illuminated and softened with reference to an old distinction between interpretation on the one hand and construction on the other. In cases of interpretation, judges (or agencies) must ascertain the meaning of a statutory term. In cases of construction, judges (or agencies) must develop implementing principles or specify a statutory term. Chevron as construction is supported by powerful arguments; it ...


Introduction, Jacqueline H. Nguyen 2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Introduction, Jacqueline H. Nguyen

Golden Gate University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, 2020 Golden Gate University School of Law

Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit

Golden Gate University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Table Of Contents, 2020 Golden Gate University School of Law

Table Of Contents

Golden Gate University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Preface, Kyndal Currie, Leticia Chavez 2020 Golden Gate University School of Law

Preface, Kyndal Currie, Leticia Chavez

Golden Gate University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Front Matter, 2020 Golden Gate University School of Law

Front Matter

Golden Gate University Law Review

Front Matter includes Masthead, Faculty Advisors, Administration.


Appellate Jurisdiction And The Emoluments Litigation, Adam N. Steinman 2020 The University of Akron

Appellate Jurisdiction And The Emoluments Litigation, Adam N. Steinman

Akron Law Review

This article—part of a symposium on federal appellate procedure—addresses questions of appellate jurisdiction that have played an important role in litigation challenging Donald Trump’s conduct under the Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses. When federal trial judges in the District of Columbia and Maryland rejected Trump’s early attempts to dismiss two of these cases, Trump sought immediate relief from the federal courts of appeals rather than allowing the litigation to proceed in the district courts. The lack of a traditional final judgment, however, prompted difficult jurisdictional issues for the D.C. Circuit and the Fourth Circuit.

In both ...


Three Ideas For Discretionary Appeals, Bryan Lammon 2020 The University of Akron

Three Ideas For Discretionary Appeals, Bryan Lammon

Akron Law Review

Discretionary appeals currently play a limited role in federal appellate jurisdiction. But reformers have long argued for a larger role. And any wholesale reform of the current appellate-jurisdiction system will likely involve additional or expanded opportunities for discretionary appeals. In this essay, I offer three ideas for the future of discretionary appeals—what form they might take in a reformed system of federal appellate jurisdiction and how we might learn about their function. First, remove any limits on the types of decisions that can be certified for immediate appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Second, give parties one ...


The Renaissance Of Permissive Interlocutory Appeals And The Demise Of The Collateral Order Doctrine, Michael E. Solimine 2020 The University of Akron

The Renaissance Of Permissive Interlocutory Appeals And The Demise Of The Collateral Order Doctrine, Michael E. Solimine

Akron Law Review

Reserving appeals to final judgments has a long history in the federal courts, as do exceptions to that rule. The problem has less been the existence of the exceptions, but rather their scope and application. This article addresses two of those exceptions. One is permissive interlocutory appeals codified in section 1292(b) of the Judicial Code. That exception, requiring the permission of both the trial and appellate courts, has numerous advantages over other exceptions, has been frequently touted as such by the Supreme Court, and has been applied in several recent high-profile cases. In contrast, the collateral order doctrine, an ...


Judicial Disqualification On Appeal, Cassandra Burke Robertson, Gregory Hilbert 2020 The University of Akron

Judicial Disqualification On Appeal, Cassandra Burke Robertson, Gregory Hilbert

Akron Law Review

Adjudication by an impartial decision maker is one of the cornerstones of due process. The interest is so fundamental that constitutional due process guards against even the appearance of partiality, and federal judges are statutorily required to disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” Courts and scholars alike have struggled with what it means to “reasonably question” a judge’s impartiality. That question has taken on greater salience in recent years, as deepening partisan divisions have increasingly led parties to express skepticism of judicial neutrality.

When a party files a motion to disqualify a ...


Digital Commons powered by bepress