Law Commons^™

Amicus Briefs, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Honest Approach To Plea Bargaining, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, the author argues that differential sentencing of criminal defendants who plead guilty and those who go to trial is, primarily, a punishment for the defendant exercising the right to trial. The proposed solution requires an analysis of the differential sentencing motivation in light of the benefit to society and the drawbacks inherent in the plea bargaining system.

The Market For Justice, The "Litigation Explosion," And The "Verdict Bubble": A Closer Look At Vanishing Trials, Frederic N. Smalkin, Frederic N.C. Smalkin

All Faculty Scholarship

Recently, a respected jurist has lamented the declining number of federal jury trials. Chief Judge William Young of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, writing in the Federal Lawyer, pointed out that jury trials in federal civil cases declined 26% in the decade between 1989 and 1999, which he attributed to four factors: the district court judiciary's loss of focus on the core function of trying jury cases; the business community's loss of interest in jury adjudication (opting out of the legal system altogether in favor of arbitration); Congress's marginalizing the district court judiciary; and the …

A Government Of Laws And Not Men: Prohibiting Non-Precedential Opinions By Statute Or Procedural Rule, Amy E. Sloan

All Faculty Scholarship

Non-precedential judicial opinions issued by the federal appellate courts have generated significant controversy. Given that the federal appellate courts are unlikely to abandon the practice of issuing non-precedential opinions on their own, what other options exist for prohibiting the practice? This article discusses the constitutionality of a procedural rule or statute prohibiting the federal appellate courts from prospectively designating selected opinions as non-precedential. It explains how the rules governing non-precedential opinions allow federal appellate courts to "opt out" of their own rules of precedent. It then examines the rulemaking process, showing how the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure are promulgated …

Different Roads To The Rule Of Law: Their Importance For Law Reform In Taiwan, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Talk of law reform is in the air throughout East Asia. Whether in Beijing or Tokyo or here, law reform is spoken of in terms of strengthening the Rule of Law. But what is the Rule of Law? Different legal systems have different roads to reach the Rule of Law. These different roads are noticeable mainly in the different emphases different systems place on two critical elements in the realization of the Rule of Law State, namely rules and the machinery for implementing the rules, i.e., courts and administrative agencies. The Rule of Law makes demands on both the legal …

Delinquency Jurisdiction In A Unified Family Court: Balancing Intervention, Prevention, And Adjudication, Gloria Danziger

All Faculty Scholarship

This article will examine the demographics of the current juvenile delinquency caseloads and will argue that, despite trends toward greater punitive measures-including placement of juveniles in adult courts for certain offenses, the concept of a therapeutic "family-centered court," which inspired Jane Addams and her colleagues, remains the most promising approach to delinquency, articulated most notably by the proponents of the unified family court concept. The article will consider and address objections and concerns raised with respect to this approach, looking at ways in which several states have incorporated juvenile delinquency into a family-centered unified family court.

Symposium Editor's Note, Barbara A. Babb

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Ub Viewpoint – Creation Of A Caring Justice System, Barbara A. Babb

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Engaging With The State: The Growing Reliance On Lawyers And Judges To Protect Battered Women, Jane C. Murphy

All Faculty Scholarship

The passage of the federal Violence Against Women Act of 2000 (“VAWA II”) marked an important milestone in the evolution of the domestic violence movement. VAWA II created, among other things, a complex system for state and federal funding in all fifty states to provide civil legal assistance to battered women. Its passage completed a process that began in the early 1980s when domestic violence advocates shifted their focus from grass roots efforts to help battered women and their children leave abusive partners to building alliances with government and advocating for legal remedies to assist battered women. This paper looks …

Judicial Independence In Family Courts, Barbara A. Babb, Judith D. Moran

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Unified Family Court, Barbara A. Babb

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The War On Terrorism And The Constitution, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

Discussion of civil liberties during wartime often omit the fact that there can be no meaningful liberty at all if our homes and offices are bombed or our loved ones are killed or injured by acts of terror. The Government must be given the tools necessary to accomplish its vital mission. The first priority must be to win the war against terrorism. There are, however, other priorities. The United States, in its just battle for freedom, must ensure that freedom is preserved during that battle as well. Moreover, care must be taken so that an exaggerated cry of “emergency” is …

The Judiciary In The United States: A Search For Fairness, Independence And Competence, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

Alexander Hamilton referred to the judiciary as “the least dangerous branch” because it could neither make nor enforce the law without help from the other two branches of government. In the years since then, however, courts and judges in the United States have assumed a much more prominent role in society. American judges preside over criminal trials and sentence those convicted, decide all kinds of civil disputes, both large and small, and make important decisions involving families, such as child custody. They have also become the primary guarantors of the civil and constitutional rights of American citizens.

The case of …

Baltimore City’S Child-Focused Court, Barbara A. Babb, Judith D. Moran

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Substance Abuse, Families, And Unified Family Courts: The Creation Of A Caring Justice System, Barbara A. Babb, Judith D. Moran

All Faculty Scholarship

This article proposes an approach to family law decision-making tailored to assist families plagued by substance abuse. Substance abuse is linked to social, health, and economic problems facing Americans today and is a factor for a substantial number of family law litigants. By failing to address substance abuse issues, the family repeatedly may need to seek court intervention. The unified family court model is the concept of a single court that coordinates the work of independent agencies and tribunals, each with some limited role in resolving the problems incident to a family's legal matters. Professor Babb has created an interdisciplinary …

Drug Treatment Courts: Evolution, Evaluation, And Future Directions, Gloria Danziger, Jeffrey Kuhn

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Where We Stand: An Analysis Of America's Family Law Adjudicatory Systems And The Mandate To Establish Unified Family Courts, Barbara A. Babb

All Faculty Scholarship

The volume and scope of family law cases in contemporary American society, as well as their unending nature both individually and systemically, exacerbate the difficulty of their resolution. To address this crisis, the American Bar Association and others have recommended court reform, specifically, the establishment of unified family courts in all jurisdictions. A unified family court is a single forum within which to adjudicate the full range of family law issues, based on the notion that court effectiveness and efficiency increase when the court resolves a family's legal problems in as few appearances as possible. The model is based on …

Sovereign Indignity? Values, Borders And The Internet: A Case Study, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

This article focuses on the publication ban issued by a Canadian court in a notorious murder trial, and the popular reaction to the publication ban, as a case study of the new global communications environment. Part I reconstructs the factual circumstances that provoked the ban, as well as the responses of the media, the legal establishment, and the public. Part II examines the ban itself, the constitutional challenge mounted by the media, and the landmark Dagenais decision. Part III reflects on the meaning of the entire episode for law, journalism, and national sovereignty.

The Dagenais decision demonstrates the continued independence …

Catch Me If You Can! Resolving The Ethical Tragedies In The Brave New World Of Jury Selection, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

Since the Supreme Court's opinion in Batson v. Kentucky, the rules and tools available to lawyers for selecting juries have changed dramatically from what they had been for decades in American courtrooms. The Court's well intentioned effort in Batson to attempt to eliminate racial discrimination from the process of jury selection set in motion a series of modifications in lawyer decision making which have changed how lawyers fill the jury box. Prior to Batson, the sacrosanct tool known as the peremptory challenge had been virtually unassailable as a jury selection weapon. Abuses by prosecutors, particularly in the southern United States, …

Closing The Barn Door After The Genie Is Out Of The Bag: Recognizing A "Futility Principle" In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

This article argues for a simple proposition: the First Amendment imposes a presumption against the suppression of speech when suppression would be futile. Suppression is futile when the speech is available to the same audience through some other medium or at some other place. The government can overcome this presumption of futility only when it asserts an important interest that is unrelated to the content of the speech in question, and only when the suppression directly advances that interest.

In Part I, the article explores the role that this unarticulated "futility principle" has played in Supreme Court and other decisions …

Defining “Co-Party” Within Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 13(G): Are Cross-Claims Between Original Defendants And Third-Party Defendants Allowable?, John Bessler

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Cable Television's New Legal Universe: Early Judicial Response To The Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

On October 29, 1984, a new era began in the relationship between law and cable television. On that day, the first major law regulation cable television, the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984,was signed into law.

Early judicial attempts to interpret the Cable Act revealed the difficulties judges had with understanding the new legal regimen. A common thread running through these varied cases, if any, was the courts' apparent lack of appreciation of the Act's complexity. Many, though not all, decisions appear to misread congressional language and misinterpret congressional intent. The first part of this Article will discuss this problem …