Law Commons^™

Health Care: Why Jurisdiction Matters, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Congress’s enactment of comprehensive healthcare reform legislation last year was the culmination of one round of an intense debate that continues today. The second round began the same day that the first round ended, when President Obama signed the legislation. In this second round, the locus of debate has shifted from Congress to the courts, which are processing a slew of lawsuits filed immediately after enactment.

One of the most prominent is Virginia v. Sebelius. The lawsuit presents on its face a prominent and critically important question of federalism: Did Congress exceed the limits of its enumerated legislative powers by …

Response To Reasonable Expectations In Sociocultural Context, David G. Epstein

Law Faculty Publications

The Article starts 6 (and ends)7 with the premise that contract law should enforce the reasonable expectations of the parties. This is a hard premise to challenge.8 And an even harder premise to apply.9 The Article recognizes the two problems with applying this premise: (1) how does a court decide what expectations are “reasonable,”10 and (2) what does a court do when the contracting parties have different reasonable expectations.11 The Article then uses two cases to illustrate how “sociocultural dissonance between a judge and contracting party”12 exacerbates these problems.

A Demographic Snapshot Of America's Federal Judiciary: A Prima Facie Case For Change, Jonathan K. Stubbs

Law Faculty Publications

Nearly a decade ago, then judge Sonia Sotomayer gave a speech at the U.C. Berkeley Law School and asked a simple question: “What it all will mean to have more women and people of color on the bench?” This article places Justice Sotomayer’s perceptive question in historical context by providing a demographic profile of the gender and race of federal judges confirmed to the bench from September 24, 1789 through January 13, 2011. The paper focuses principally upon federal courts of general jurisdiction, specifically, the Supreme Court, the various Courts of Appeal and the federal district courts. After presenting historical …

A Realist Defense Of The Alien Tort Statute, Robert Knowles

Law Faculty Publications

This Article offers a new justification for modern litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a provision from the 1789 Judiciary Act that permits victims of human rights violations anywhere in the world to sue tortfeasors in U.S. courts. The ATS, moribund for nearly 200 years, has recently emerged as an important but controversial tool for the enforcement of human rights norms. “Realist” critics contend that ATS litigation exasperates U.S. allies and rivals, weakens efforts to combat terrorism, and threatens U.S. sovereignty by importing into our jurisprudence undemocratic international law norms. Defenders of the statute, largely because they do not …