Law Commons^™

The Fragmentation Of Federal Rules, Erwin Chemerinsky, Barry Friedman

Mercer Law Review

In 1938, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were adopted. Their adoption represented a triumph of uniformity over localism. The lengthy debate that prefaced the adoption of the rules focused upon the value of a national set of rules, as opposed to the then-governing practice of "conformity," in which local federal practice mirrored that of the state in which the federal courts sat. Although many different arguments were offered in favor of the federal rules, at bottom the rules' proponents carried the day by arguing that procedure ought to be the same across the federal courts and the cases those …

United Mine Workers V. Bagwell: The Civil/Criminal Indirect Contempt Fine Distinction Revisited, Franklin P. Brannen Jr.

Mercer Law Review

United Mine Workers v. Bagwell involves the imposition of indirect contempt fines stemming from a labor dispute in Virginia. In April 1989, respondents Clinchfield Coal and Sea "B" Mining Companies filed suit to enjoin petitioner International Union, United Mine Workers of America from conducting unlawful strike activities. The trial court entered an injunction that prohibited the union and its members from undertaking illegal strike-related activities. In subsequent hearings, the court imposed over $64,000,000 in fines. The trial court required that the companies prove violations of the injunction beyond a reasonable doubt but did not afford the union the right to …

Introduction To Mercer Law Review Symposium On Federal Judicial Independence, L. Ralph Mecham

Mercer Law Review

No abstract provided.

Congress And The Courts: Establishing A Constructive Dialogue, Orrin G. Hatch

Mercer Law Review

The topic of federal judicial independence is an amorphous one, and Professor Redish's fine contribution to this symposium provides meaningful shape and structure to this topic. I will leave it largely to the academics to debate the many theoretical questions raised by Professor Redish. At the outset, I would simply like to offer a few observations on the four categories into which Professor Redish subdivides the concept of federal judicial independence.

I agree with Professor Redish that what he labels "institutional" independence, "decisional" independence, and "counter-majoritarian" independence identify those basic respects in which the Constitution guarantees the federal courts protections …

Judicial Power And The Rules Enabling Act, Linda S. Mullenix

Mercer Law Review

Congress undermines and erodes judicial power when it imperially declares and exercises an exclusive right to enact federal procedural rules. Thus, congressional intrusion into federal procedural rulemaking is the most significant contemporary issue of judicial independence. The proper province of procedural rulemaking is no mere pointillist academic quibble, but rather an issue that runs to the core of judicial power. A judiciary that cannot create its own procedural rules is not an independent judiciary Moreover, a judiciary that constitutionally and statutorily is entitled to create its own procedural rules, but must perform that function under a constant cloud of congressional …