Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Random Chance Or Loaded Dice: The Politics Of Judicial Designation, Todd C. Peppers, Katherine Vigilante, Christopher Zorn
Random Chance Or Loaded Dice: The Politics Of Judicial Designation, Todd C. Peppers, Katherine Vigilante, Christopher Zorn
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] “In the 1950s and 1960s, the southern states struggled to respond to the civil rights decisions being issued by the U.S. Supreme Court as well as the new civil rights laws being passed by Congress. The judicial battleground for this perfect storm of evasion and massive resistance was found in the “old” Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which encompassed the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. In the “old” Fifth Circuit, a minority of liberal appeals court judges—sympathetic to the civil rights movement—used all legal and administrative power at their disposal to make sure that the …
Iqbal, Al-Kidd And Pleading Past Qualified Immunity: What The Cases Mean And How They Demonstrate A Need To Eliminate The Immunity Doctrines From Constitutional Tort Law, John M. Greabe
Law Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s decisions in Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Ashcroft v. al-Kidd contain issue-framing statements indicating that a constitutional tort plaintiff is required to plead facts sufficient to establish the inapplicability of the qualified immunity defense. Yet, framing the issue in this way ignores the Court’s earlier decisions in Gomez v. Toledo and Crawford-El v. Britton and is at odds with the established law of pleading; a plaintiff is not required to anticipate an affirmative defense and negate its applicability in the complaint. These cases thus raise a number of questions—Does the Court really mean what its issue-framing statements suggest? …
Mirabile Dictum! The Case For 'Unnecessary' Constitutional Rulings In Civil Rights Damages Actions, John M. Greabe
Mirabile Dictum! The Case For 'Unnecessary' Constitutional Rulings In Civil Rights Damages Actions, John M. Greabe
Law Faculty Scholarship
This article contends that, for purposes of settling the law, courts entertaining civil rights lawsuits doomed to fail on grounds of qualified immunity should presumably address the question whether the complaint pleads a viable claim that the defendant caused a violation of the plaintiff's federal rights. The article also contends that such "unnecessary" threshold rulings are not dicta.