Annotated Brief Of Professors Of Public International Law And Comparative Law As Amici Curiae In Samantar V. Yousuf, 2011 UC Hastings College of the Law
Annotated Brief Of Professors Of Public International Law And Comparative Law As Amici Curiae In Samantar V. Yousuf, Chimène Keitner
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Punishment As Contract, 2011 University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Punishment As Contract, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
All Faculty Scholarship
This paper provides a sketch of a contractarian approach to punishment, according to a version of contractarianism one might call “rational contractarianism,” by contrast with the normative contractarianism of John Rawls. Rational contractarianism suggests a model according to which rational agents, with maximal, rather than minimal, knowledge of their life circumstances, would agree to the outlines of a particular social institution or set of social institutions because they view themselves as faring best in such a society governed by such institutions, as compared with a society governed by different institutional schemes available for adoption. Applied to the institution of punishment, …
Technologies Of Control And The Future Of The First Amendment, 2011 University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Technologies Of Control And The Future Of The First Amendment, Christopher S. Yoo
All Faculty Scholarship
The technological context surrounding the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation allowed the Court to gloss over the tension between two rather disparate rationales. Those adopting a civil libertarian view of free speech could support the decision on the grounds that viewers’ and listeners’ inability to filter out unwanted speech exposed them to content that they did not wish to see or hear. At the same time, Pacifica also found support from those who more paternalistically regard indecency as low value (if not socially harmful) speech that is unworthy of full First Amendment protection. The arrival of …
Life After Bilski, 2011 Stanford University
Life After Bilski, Mark A. Lemley, Michael Risch, Ted Sichelman, R. Polk Wagner
All Faculty Scholarship
In Bilski v. Kappos, the Supreme Court declined calls to categorically exclude business methods—or any technology—from the patent law. It also rejected as the sole test of subject matter eligibility the Federal Circuit’s deeply-flawed machine-or-transformation test, under which no process is patentable unless it is tied to a particular machine or transforms an article to another state or thing. Subsequent developments threaten to undo that holding, however. Relying on the Court’s description of the Federal Circuit test as a “useful and important clue,” the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, patent litigants, and district courts have all continued to rely on …
Two Cheers, Not Three For Sixth Amendment Originalism, 2011 University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Two Cheers, Not Three For Sixth Amendment Originalism, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Advocacy Revalued, 2011 University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Advocacy Revalued, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr., Dana A. Remus
All Faculty Scholarship
A central and ongoing debate among legal ethics scholars addresses the moral positioning of adversarial advocacy. Most participants in this debate focus on the structure of our legal system and the constituent role of the lawyer-advocate. Many are highly critical, arguing that the core structure of adversarial advocacy is the root cause of many instances of lawyer misconduct. In this Article, we argue that these scholars’ focuses are misguided. Through reflection on Aristotle’s treatise, Rhetoric, we defend advocacy in our legal system’s litigation process as ethically positive and as pivotal to fair and effective dispute resolution. We recognize that advocacy …
International Law As Law, Law As A System Of Rule-Governed Conduct, 2011 Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law
International Law As Law, Law As A System Of Rule-Governed Conduct, John Lawrence Hargrove
Villanova Law Review
The article discusses international law and systems of rule-governed conduct as of July 2011, focusing on the roles of claimants and recalcitrants in a legal system, as well as the international law mechanisms for developing additional rules within a legal system. The views of philosopher John Locke regarding the law are examined, including his idea of a common judge.
Temporary Insanity: The Strange Life And Times Of The Perfect Defense, 2011 Georgia State University College of Law
Temporary Insanity: The Strange Life And Times Of The Perfect Defense, Russell D. Covey
Faculty Publications By Year
The temporary insanity defense has a prominent place in the mythology of criminal law. Because it seems to permit factually guilty defendants to escape both punishment and institutionalization, some imagine it as the “perfect defense.” In fact, the defense has been invoked in a dizzying variety of contexts and, at times, has proven highly successful. Successful or not, the temporary insanity defense has always been accompanied by a storm of controversy, in part because it is often most successful in cases where the defendant’s basic claim is that honor, revenge, or tragic circumstance – not mental illness in its more …
Arbitral And Judicial Proceedings: Indistinguishable Justice Or Justice Denied?, 2011 University of Pittsburgh School of Law
Arbitral And Judicial Proceedings: Indistinguishable Justice Or Justice Denied?, Pat K. Chew
Articles
This is an exploratory study comparing the processes and outcomes in the arbitration and the litigation of workplace racial harassment cases. Drawing from an emerging large database of arbitral opinions, this article indicates that arbitration outcomes yield a lower percentage of employee successes than in litigation of these types of cases. At the same time, while arbitration proceedings have some of the same legal formalities (legal representation, legal briefs), they do not have other protective procedural safeguards.
The First Principles Of Standing: Privilege, System Justification, And The Predictable Incoherence Of Article Iii, 2011 University of Pittsburgh School of Law
The First Principles Of Standing: Privilege, System Justification, And The Predictable Incoherence Of Article Iii, Christian Sundquist
Articles
This Article examines the indeterminacy of standing doctrine by deconstructing recent desegregation, affirmative action, and racial profiling cases. This examination is an attempt to uncover the often unstated meta-principles that guide standing jurisprudence. The Article contends that the inherent indeterminacy of standing law can be understood as reflecting an unstated desire to protect racial and class privilege, which is accomplished through the dogma of individualism, equal opportunity (liberty), and “white innocence.” Relying on insights from System Justification Theory, a burgeoning field of social psychology, the Article argues that the seemingly incoherent results in racial standing cases can be understood as …
Affirmative Action As Government Speech, 2011 University of Pittsburgh School of Law
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 …
Does The Compensation Clause Burden The Government Or Benefit The Owner? The Compensation Clause As Process, 2011 University of Pittsburgh School of Law
Does The Compensation Clause Burden The Government Or Benefit The Owner? The Compensation Clause As Process, Joshua Galperin
Articles
One of many ideas indelibly drawn in the legal vernacular is that “if a regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking.” This workhorse of a phrase has shouldered the bulk of the regulatory takings doctrine since the first half of the last century. So much ink has been spilled in an attempt to parse the meaning of “too far,” and yet the academic and judicial communities have made little progress towards a better understanding. This article, therefore, seeks to divert some attention away from the meaning of “taking”, and put a little more focus on the …
China's Turn Against Law, 2011 Fordham University School of Law
China's Turn Against Law, Carl F. Minzner
Faculty Scholarship
Chinese authorities are reconsidering legal reforms they enacted in the 1980s and 1990s. These reforms had emphasized law, litigation, and courts as institutions for resolving civil grievances between citizens and administrative grievances against the state. But social stability concerns have led top leaders to question these earlier reforms. Central Party leaders now fault legal reforms for insufficiently responding to (or even generating) surging numbers of petitions and protests.
Chinese authorities have now drastically altered course. Substantively, they are de-emphasizing the role of formal law and court adjudication. They are attempting to revive pre-1978 Maoist-style court mediation practices. Procedurally, Chinese authorities …
The Ethics Of Unbranding, 2011 St. John's University School of Law
The Ethics Of Unbranding, Jeremy N. Sheff
Faculty Publications
This Essay explores the ethical implications of the phenomenon of "unbranding" that has recently been discussed in popular and scholarly literature. It compares two extant definitions of unbranding and examines each under alternative ethical theories of trademark law, specifically deontological and consequentialist theories. With respect to each of these theories, the Essay examines the ethical questions raised by the existence of asymmetric information between brand owners and consumers. This includes asymmetries not only with regard to information about products, but also with regard to information about consumer decision-making processes. The latter asymmetry presents conflicts between deontological and consequentialist conclusions regarding …
Justice For Hedgehogs, 2011 Notre Dame Law School
Justice For Hedgehogs, Robert E. Rodes
Journal Articles
Professor Dworkin begins this complex and ambitious book with a chapter called "Baedeker" after the nineteenth century guidebooks. In it, he gives an overview of his project, which is to show "the unity of value." The "title refers to a line by an ancient Greek poet, Archilochus, that Isaiah Berlin made famous for us. The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing. Value is one big thing" (1).
He articulates his overarching value in terms of human dignity: "[W]e each have a sovereign ethical responsibility to make something of value of our own lives, as a …
Citizens United And The Illusion Of Coherence, 2011 Loyola Law School-Los Angeles
Citizens United And The Illusion Of Coherence, Richard L. Hasen
Michigan Law Review
The self-congratulatory tone of the majority and concurring opinions in last term's controversial Supreme Court blockbuster, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, extended beyond the trumpeting of an absolutist vision of the First Amendment that allows corporations to spend unlimited sums independently to support or oppose candidates for office. The triumphalism extended to the majority's view that it had imposed coherence on the unwieldy body of campaign finance jurisprudence by excising an "outlier" 1990 opinion, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which had upheld such corporate limits, and parts of a 2003 opinion, McConnell v. FEC, extending Austin to unions …
What Happened: Confronting Confrontation In The Wake Of Bullcoming, Bryant, And Crawford., 2011 St. Mary's University
What Happened: Confronting Confrontation In The Wake Of Bullcoming, Bryant, And Crawford., Dibrell Waldrip, Sara M. Berkeley
St. Mary's Law Journal
Crawford v. Washington and its progeny demonstrate the difficulty of delineating both the core and the perimeter of the Confrontation Clause. Crawford abrogated Ohio v. Roberts, forcing trial lawyers to re-evaluate the use of various types of hearsay formerly admitted upon a finding of adequate “indicia of reliability.” Later the Court issued two decisions further altering the contours of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence. Michigan v. Bryant and Bullcoming v. New Mexico. With these options, the old Roberts “indicia of reliability” test transformed into the new “primary purpose” test to identify certain testimonial statements. By significantly altering the contours of Confrontation Clause …
Guns, Inc.: Citizens United, Mcdonald, And The Future Of Corporate Constitutional Rights, 2011 Duke Law School
Guns, Inc.: Citizens United, Mcdonald, And The Future Of Corporate Constitutional Rights, Darrell A. H. Miller
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court began its 2009 Term by addressing the constitutional rights of corporations. It ended the Term by addressing the incorporated rights of the Constitution. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a five-member majority of the Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to spend their own money on political advocacy. A corporation generally is no different than a natural person when it comes to the First Amendment - at least as it relates to political speech. In McDonald v. City of Chicago, a plurality of the Court held that the Second Amendment to the United …
Roberts’ Rules: The Assertiveness Of Rules-Based Jurisprudence, 2011 Duke Law School
Roberts’ Rules: The Assertiveness Of Rules-Based Jurisprudence, Joseph Blocher
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Fundamental Norms, International Law, And The Extraterritorial Constitution, 2011 University of PIttsburgh School of Law
Fundamental Norms, International Law, And The Extraterritorial Constitution, Jules Lobel
Articles
The Supreme Court, in Boumediene v. Bush, decisively rejected the Bush Administration's argument that the Constitution does not apply to aliens detained by the United States government abroad. However, the functional, practicality focused test articulated in Boumediene to determine when the constitution applies extraterritorially is in considerable tension with the fundamental norms jurisprudence that underlies and pervades the Court’s opinion. This Article seeks to reintegrate Boumediene's fundamental norms jurisprudence into its functional test, arguing that the functional test for extraterritorial application of habeas rights should be informed by fundamental norms of international law. The Article argues that utilizing international law’s …