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

Jurisprudence Commons

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

6,943 Full-Text Articles 4,225 Authors 3,286,156 Downloads 144 Institutions

All Articles in Jurisprudence

Faceted Search

6,943 full-text articles. Page 2 of 159.

Global Judicial Transparency Norms: A Peek Behind The Robes In A Whole New World — A Look At Global “Democratizing” Trends In Judicial Opinion-Issuing Practices, J. Lyn Entrikin 2019 William H. Bowen School of Law, University of Arkansas Little Rock

Global Judicial Transparency Norms: A Peek Behind The Robes In A Whole New World — A Look At Global “Democratizing” Trends In Judicial Opinion-Issuing Practices, J. Lyn Entrikin

Washington University Global Studies Law Review

Global developments over the last two decades have debunked the traditional understanding that separate opinions are idiosyncratic of courts in nations following the common law tradition. History reflects that judicial opinion-issuing practices have evolved around the world, adapting to the increasing globalization of legal systems. And recent research confirms that most international and supranational tribunals, even those headquartered in continental Europe, expressly permit individual judges to issue separate opinions, although in some courts various internal norms and customs operate to discourage the practice. In addition, the majority of European national constitutional courts now permit individual judges to publish separate opinions ...


Finding Law, Stephen E. Sachs 2019 Duke Law School

Finding Law, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

That the judge's task is to find the law, not to make it, was once a commonplace of our legal culture. Today, decades after Erie, the idea of a common law discovered by judges is commonly dismissed -- as a "fallacy," an "illusion," a "brooding omnipresence in the sky." That dismissive view is wrong. Expecting judges to find unwritten law is no childish fiction of the benighted past, but a real and plausible option for a modern legal system.

This Essay seeks to restore the respectability of finding law, in part by responding to two criticisms made by Erie and ...


Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis 2019 Penn State Dickinson Law

Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis

Dickinson Law Review

A confession presented at trial is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against a criminal defendant, which means that the rules governing its admissibility are critical. At the outset of confession admissibility in the United States, the judiciary focused on a confession’s truthfulness. Culminating in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, judicial concern with the reliability of confessions shifted away from whether a confession was true and towards curtailing unconstitutional police misconduct. Post-hoc constitutionality review, however, is arguably inappropriate. Such review is inappropriate largely because the reviewing court must find that the confession was voluntary only by ...


Whose Market Is It Anyway? A Philosophy And Law Critique Of The Supreme Court’S Free-Speech Absolutism, Spencer Bradley 2019 Penn State Dickinson Law

Whose Market Is It Anyway? A Philosophy And Law Critique Of The Supreme Court’S Free-Speech Absolutism, Spencer Bradley

Dickinson Law Review

In the wake of Charlottesville, the rise of the alt-right, and campus controversies, the First Amendment has fallen into public scrutiny. Historically, the First Amendment’s “marketplace of ideas” has been a driving source of American political identity; since Brandenburg v. Ohio, the First Amendment protects all speech from government interference unless it causes incitement. The marketplace of ideas allows for the good and the bad ideas to enter American society and ultimately allows the people to decide their own course.

Yet, is the First Amendment truly a tool of social progress? Initially, the First Amendment curtailed war-time dissidents and ...


A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen 2019 Penn State Dickinson Law

A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen

Dickinson Law Review

President Trump’s executive order rescinding federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions” has brought a critical, but overlooked, question of constitutional law to the forefront of the political debate: how does the Spending Clause apply to local governments? The purpose of the Spending Clause is to empower the federal government to bargain with the states to enact policies it cannot enact itself. This power, however, is constrained within the confines of federalism. The Supreme Court has sought to restrict the Spending Clause by crafting the Dole-NFIB framework, a test to determine whether a federal grant has compromised federalism. At its ...


The Declaration Of Independence And The American Theory Of Government: “First Come Rights, And Then Comes Government”, Randy E. Barnett 2019 Georgetown University Law Center

The Declaration Of Independence And The American Theory Of Government: “First Come Rights, And Then Comes Government”, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The topic of this panel is the Declaration of Independence, to which I devoted a chapter of my recent book, Our Republican Constitution. I want to draw on that book to make five points.


Contracts, Constitutions, And Getting The Interpretation-Construction Distinction Right, Gregory Klass 2019 Georgetown University Law Center

Contracts, Constitutions, And Getting The Interpretation-Construction Distinction Right, Gregory Klass

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Interpretation determines the meaning of a legal actor’s words or other significant acts, construction their legal effect. Using contract law and then two nineteenth century theories of constitutional interpretation as examples, this Article advances four claims about interpretation, construction, and the relationship between the two. First, many theorists, following Francis Lieber, assume that rules of construction apply only when interpretation runs out, such as when a text’s meaning is ambiguous or does not address an issue. In fact, a rule of construction is always necessary to determine a legal speech act’s effect, including when its meaning is ...


Should Robots Prosecute And Defend?, Stephen E. Henderson 2018 University of Oklahoma College of Law

Should Robots Prosecute And Defend?, Stephen E. Henderson

Stephen E Henderson

Even when we achieve the ‘holy grail’ of artificial intelligence—machine intelligence that is at least as smart as a human being in every area of thought—there may be classes of decisions for which it is intrinsically important to retain a human in the loop. On the common account of American criminal adjudication, the role of prosecutor seems to include such decisions given the largely unreviewable declination authority, whereas the role of defense counsel would seem fully susceptible of automation. Even for the prosecutor, the benefits of automation might outweigh the intrinsic decision-making loss, given that the ultimate decision ...


Originalism And Second-Order Ipse Dixit Reasoning In Chisholm V. Georgia, D. A. Jeremy Telman 2018 Valparaiso University Law School

Originalism And Second-Order Ipse Dixit Reasoning In Chisholm V. Georgia, D. A. Jeremy Telman

D. A. Jeremy Telman


This Article presents a new perspective on the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence during the Early Republic.  It focuses on what I am calling second-order ipse dixit reasoning, which occurs when Justices have to decide between two incommensurable interpretive modalities.  If first-order ipse dixit is unreasoned decision-making, second-order ipse dixit involves an unreasoned choice between or among two or more equally valid interpretive options.  The early Court often had recourse to second-order ipse dixit because methodological eclecticism characterized its constitutional jurisprudence, and the early Court established no fixed hierarchy among interpretive modalities.
Chisholm, the pre-Marshall Court’s most important constitutional ...


All That Is Liquidated Melts Into Air: Five Meta-Interpretive Issues, D. A. Jeremy Telman 2018 Valparaiso University Law School

All That Is Liquidated Melts Into Air: Five Meta-Interpretive Issues, D. A. Jeremy Telman

D. A. Jeremy Telman


The promise of originalism is that it helps us to fix constitutional meaning and constrain constitutional decision-makers.  There are significant constitutional questions that originalism can help resolve, at least to the extent that constitutional decision-makers buy in to originalism. However, even assuming that originalism is normatively desirable, there are certain issues that are fundamental to constitutional decision-making but that originalism cannot help us resolve. The Framers were hopelessly divided on them, and they may not be susceptible to Madisonian “liquidation.”  That is, at least some of these issues still generate live controversies even though they some of them seem to ...


Originalism As Fable, D. A. Jeremy Telman 2018 Valparaiso University Law School

Originalism As Fable, D. A. Jeremy Telman

D. A. Jeremy Telman


Eric Segall’s Originalism as Faith provides both a history of the originalist movement in constitutional interpretation and a critique of that movement from the perspective of legal realism.This Review Essay summarizes Segall’s main argument: as originalism has abandoned deference to the political branches, it has become indistinguishable from its nemesis, living constitutionalism. Emptied of substance, originalism becomes nothing more than an expression of faith. Segall makes his argument very convincingly, evidencing both his knowledge of originalism, in all its variants and his mastery of constitutional doctrine.
This Essay offers two ways in which Segall’s exemplary work ...


Rethinking The Federal Indian Status Test: A Look At The Supreme Court's Classification Of The Freedmen Of The Five Civilized Tribe Of Oklahoma, Clint Summers 2018 University of Tulsa College of Law

Rethinking The Federal Indian Status Test: A Look At The Supreme Court's Classification Of The Freedmen Of The Five Civilized Tribe Of Oklahoma, Clint Summers

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.


Certainty Vs. Flexibility In The Conflict Of Laws, Kermit Roosevelt III 2018 University of Pennsylvania Law School

Certainty Vs. Flexibility In The Conflict Of Laws, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

Traditional choice of law theory conceives of certainty and flexibility as opposed values: increase one, and you inevitably decrease the other. This article challenges the received wisdom by reconceptualizing the distinction. Rather than caring about certainty or flexibility for their own sake, it suggests, we care about them because each makes it easier to promote a certain cluster of values. And while there may be a necessary tradeoff between certainty and flexibility, there is no necessary tradeoff between the clusters of values. It is possible to improve a choice of law system with regard to both of them. The article ...


Finality, Appealability, And The Scope Of Interlocutory Review, Bryan Lammon 2018 University of Washington School of Law

Finality, Appealability, And The Scope Of Interlocutory Review, Bryan Lammon

Washington Law Review

Most of the law of federal appellate jurisdiction comes from judicial interpretations of 28 U.S.C. § 1291. That statute gives the courts of appeals jurisdiction over only “final decisions” of the district courts. The federal courts have used this grant of jurisdiction to create most of the rules governing appellate jurisdiction. But those efforts have required giving many different meanings to the term “final decision.” And those many different meanings are to blame for much of the confusion, complexity, unpredictability, and inflexibility that plague this area of law. The literature has accordingly advocated reform that would base most of ...


Collusion, Obstruction Of Justice, And Impeachment, Ediberto Roman, Melissa Gonzalez, Dianet Torres 2018 Notre Dame Law School

Collusion, Obstruction Of Justice, And Impeachment, Ediberto Roman, Melissa Gonzalez, Dianet Torres

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.


Is The First Amendment Obsolete?, Tim Wu 2018 Columbia Law School

Is The First Amendment Obsolete?, Tim Wu

Michigan Law Review

The First Amendment was brought to life in a period, the twentieth century, when the political speech environment was markedly different than today’s. With respect to any given issue, speech was scarce and limited to a few newspapers, pamphlets or magazines. The law was embedded, therefore, with the presumption that the greatest threat to free speech was direct punishment of speakers by government.

Today, in the internet and social media age, it is no longer speech that is scarce—rather, it is the attention of listeners. And those who seek to control speech use new methods that rely on ...


If An Interpreter Mistranslates In A Courtroom And There Is No Recording, Does Anyone Care?: The Case For Protecting Lep Defendants’ Constitutional Rights, Lisa Santaniello 2018 Northwestern Pritzker School of Law

If An Interpreter Mistranslates In A Courtroom And There Is No Recording, Does Anyone Care?: The Case For Protecting Lep Defendants’ Constitutional Rights, Lisa Santaniello

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.


Investment Disputes Oltre Lo Stato: On Global Administrative Law, And Fair And Equitable Treatment, Sebastián López Escarcena 2018 Pontifical Catholic University of Chile

Investment Disputes Oltre Lo Stato: On Global Administrative Law, And Fair And Equitable Treatment, Sebastián López Escarcena

Boston College Law Review

Global Administrative Law is an academic project that attempts to describe the emergence of a regulatory space beyond the state and to prescribe solutions to the problems it diagnoses through certain normative principles like participation, transparency, reasoned decision-making, judicial review, accountability, proportionality, and legitimate expectations. In the case of investment treaty arbitration, the principles advanced by Global Administrative Law are akin to the constitutive elements of the fair and equitable treatment that international arbitral tribunals have identified in investor-state disputes. As classified by international law scholars, these constitutive elements of fair and equitable treatment include due process, arbitrariness, non-discrimination, vigilance ...


Principles Of Risk Imposition And The Priority Of Avoiding Harm, Gregory C. Keating 2018 University of Southern California

Principles Of Risk Imposition And The Priority Of Avoiding Harm, Gregory C. Keating

University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series

Standards which prescribe more than efficient precaution against physical harm and health injury are commonplace in American environmental, health and safety regulation. The “safe level” standard, for example, requires the elimination of all significant risks. The “feasibility” standard requires the elimination of significant risks to the extent insofar as it is possible to do so without impairing the long run survival of the activities which give rise to the risks. These standards reach back more than a generation to the founding of the Environmental Protection and Occupational Health and Safety Agencies. You might expect them to be too well-entrenched to ...


A Dollar For Your Thoughts: Determining Whether Nominal Damages Prevent An Otherwise Moot Case From Being An Advisory Opinion, Maura B. Grealish 2018 Fordham University School of Law

A Dollar For Your Thoughts: Determining Whether Nominal Damages Prevent An Otherwise Moot Case From Being An Advisory Opinion, Maura B. Grealish

Fordham Law Review

This Note examines whether nominal damages should sustain an otherwise moot constitutional claim. A majority of circuit courts have held that a lone claim for nominal damages is sufficient. A minority of circuit courts have determined that nominal damages are insufficient because there is no practical effect in determining such a case. The courts in the minority analogize nominal damages to declaratory judgments and justify their rulings on the basis of judicial economy. This Note proposes that the minority rule is impermissible under current precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court. However, this Note also proposes that the majority rule ...


Digital Commons powered by bepress