Law Commons^™

Policy And Poppycock In Proximate Cause Cases A/K/A Scope Of Liability And Starting To Make Sense, Thomas Galligan

FIU Law Review

Studying proximate cause is like trying to decode mumbo jumbo. Courts continue to use words like direct, remote, natural and probable, foreseeable, hindsight, and intervening and superseding causes, and they make them sound like tests. They make them sound like law. Furthermore, as one test is debunked and another appears, courts continue to apply the debunked tests. They just pile on a new one as well. Then, they calm themselves and say that proximate cause is all a matter of policy. After all, Leon Green said that; William Prosser said that. It must be true. But courts fail to ever …

Clarifying Concreteness: Statutory Grants Of Standing After Spokeo And Transunion, Naomi Eid

FIU Law Review

Article III limits the federal judicial power to deciding “cases” and “controversies,” demanding that a plaintiff suffer real, concrete, de facto harm to sue in federal court. In Spokeo and TransUnion, the Supreme Court clarified the outer limits of concreteness by making clear to plaintiffs that an injury in law is not an injury in fact. The Court largely grounded the decisions in the separation of powers, setting a tone that appears less deferential to Congress in its creation of statutory rights of action. A plaintiff does not automatically satisfy the injury-in-fact requirement whenever Congress grants a right and purports …

Electing The Supreme Court, Dmitry Bam

FIU Law Review

There is a curious irony in how we select United States Supreme Court justices. According to basic constitutional theory, as well as the arguments made by many leading Framers at the time of the Founding, one of the Court’s primary roles is to serve as a check on the executive and legislative branches when they exceed the constitutional limits imposed by the American people. Yet, we ask those very branches to jointly select the justices responsible for enforcing these limits, leaving the American people with only an indirect (if any) role in the process. Not surprisingly, the justices nominated by …

The Impact The Supreme Court's Decision Has On Public Opinion, Mckenzie Dunigan

Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects

By creating a survey, the analyzation of Akron college students public opinion shifts in regard to the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization occurred. The data gathered allowed for the support of different trends that were able to assist in providing information towards the research question.

A Critical Juncture: The Convergence Of Natural Resource Management And Tribal Sovereignty, Anna Aleta Butterfield

Graduate Student Portfolios, Professional Papers, and Capstone Projects

This portfolio reflects the work I’ve done in my four years as a dual degree student, pursuing a Master of Science in Environmental Studies and a juris doctorate degree, and focuses on policies and laws surrounding natural resource management. It touches on how those policies relate to and expand or constrict the exercise of sovereignty by indigenous populations.

This piece first considers the effects of plastic on salmon populations and those indigenous groups that rely on salmon for subsistence and cultural purposes. The remaining three pieces focus on various aspects of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes - Montana Water …

The Shadow Defendants, Mariam A. Hinds

Faculty Scholarship

Although the overrepresentation of men, specifically Black men and men of color, in the criminal legal system is well documented, the people who support these men, especially women, have garnered less attention. Women who are proximate to system-involved men—mothers, grandmothers, sisters, daughters, girlfriends, and wives—are invisible actors in the criminal legal system who perform critical tasks and provide essential support. They appear in court to demonstrate a person’s family and community ties, use their assets as collateral for bail, deposit money in commissary accounts, maintain social ties during imprisonment through letters and visits, and bear the burden of filling the …

Symposium Transcript, In Re Opioid Litigation: The Pretrial Phase, Rodger D. Citron

Touro Law Review

In October 2023, Touro Law Center held a two-day conference on “The Past and Future of Opioid Litigation.” The inspiration for the conference was an extraordinary five-month jury trial in Suffolk County presided over by Hon. Jerry Garguilo. The trial, which was the first in the United States to include all parties in the pharmaceutical supply chain, from manufacturers to wholesale distributors to retail sellers, began in the summer of 2021. As Touro Law Dean Elena Langan notes in her introductory remarks below, because of the pandemic, the trial began and continued for a period of time in the auditorium …

Addressing Opioid Use Disorder In The Middle East And North Africa (Mena) Regions, Alyaa Chace

Touro Law Review

The opioid crisis has devastated communities across the United States, prompting extensive litigation against pharmaceutical companies for their role in fueling addiction. Aggressive pharmaceutical marketing has led to the development of key lawsuits against Purdue Pharmaceuticals, the Sackler family, Johnson & Johnson, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, as well as a landmark $26 billion global settlement involving major distributors. U.S. courts have played a crucial role in corporate accountability, mandating record financial settlements alongside behavioral and policy reforms. By contrast, the opioid crisis in MENA, which stemmed largely from illicit drug trafficking often linked to geopolitical instability, has been more often met …

“In Defiance Of Gifts”: The Dutch Origins Of The Foreign Emoluments Clause, Liam E. Cronan

Touro Law Review

Starting in 2017, a series of lawsuits against President Donald Trump grounded their arguments on a long-overlooked portion of the Constitution: the Foreign Emoluments Clause, which in its most basic form bans government officials from accepting gifts, or “emoluments,” from foreign entities. Until 2017, few courts or scholars had ever scrutinized this provision. But with Trump’s presidency and enduring reports of his foreign business dealings, this oft-shunned area of the law suddenly garnered the attention of courts and scholars alike. Because of a clear “lack of precedent” on this matter, federal judges soon parsed historical records to determine the Clause’s …

Symposium Transcript, In Re Opioid Litigation: The Trial Phase, Rodger D. Citron

Touro Law Review

In October 2023, Touro Law Center held a two-day conference on “The Past and Future of Opioid Litigation.” The inspiration for the conference was an extraordinary five-month jury trial in Suffolk County presided over by Hon. Jerry Garguilo. The trial, which was the first in the United States to include all parties in the pharmaceutical supply chain, from manufacturers to wholesale distributors to retail sellers, began in the summer of 2021. Ultimately, in 2022, the case settled. This allowed Judge Garguilo and attorneys from the case – Jayne Conroy, who represented one of the plaintiffs, Suffolk County, and Harvey Bartle, …

Pozen And The Puzzle Of Counterfactuals, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Constitution and the War on Drugs, David Pozen’s carefully researched and brilliantly argued book, is both illuminating and disturbing: illuminating because it unearths forgotten moments when judicially formulated constitutional doctrine that could have ended or sharply restricted the War on Drugs were well within the Overton Window, and disturbing because it surfaces hard questions about historical contingency and the scope of the change that might have occurred in a counterfactual world. In this review, the author argues that the failure to specify both the nature of the counterfactual and the breadth of the alternative possibility have confused discussions …

De/Reconstructing Delinquency, Eduardo R. Ferrer

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Hundreds of thousands of children are brought under the jurisdiction of delinquency courts every year in the United States. Despite the reality that most children engage in delinquent behavior during their adolescence, poor children, children of color, children with disabilities, and children who identify as LGBTQIA+ comprise a disproportionate number of those who become delinquency system-involved. These disparities exist by design. Their origins can be traced back to the flawed first principles upon which the juvenile court was built and, specifically, to the unduly expansive legal definition of delinquency that has undergirded the jurisdiction and power of the juvenile court …

Trauma-Informed Courts? How Judges May Influence Kids’ Experiences Of Court, Eva Mckinsey, Amelia Ashton Thorn, Minjee Kristin Kim, Catherine Gorey

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Automating International Human Rights Adjudication, Veronika Fikfak, Laurence R. Helfer

Faculty Scholarship

International human rights courts and treaty bodies are increasingly turning to automated decision-making (“ADM”) technologies to expedite and enhance their review of individual complaints. These tribunals have yet to consider many of the legal, normative, and practical issues raised by the use of different types of automation technologies for these purposes. This article offers a comprehensive and balanced assessment of the benefits and challenges of introducing ADM into international human rights adjudication. We argue in favor of using ADM to digitize documents and for internal case management purposes and to make straightforward recommendations regarding registration, inadmissibility, and the calculation of …

The Judicial Administrative Power, Jonathan Petkun, Joseph Schottenfeld

Faculty Scholarship

Article III of the Constitution confines the “judicial Power of the United States” to the adjudication of “cases” and “controversies.” In practice, however, federal judges exercise control over, and spend their scarce time on, a wide range of activities that traverse far beyond any individual adjudication. Typically classified as a form of “judicial administration,” these activities span everything from promulgating the rules of the various federal courts to overseeing federal pretrial detention services or choosing federal public defenders.

This Article describes how judges became involved in these nonadjudicatory Article III activities, clarifies the activities’ relationship to Article III adjudication, and …

History And Tradition As Heightened Scrutiny, Andrew Willinger

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court is turning to methodologies privileging text, history, and tradition, or THT, to interpret and implement various constitutional provisions. The Court has recently endorsed historically-focused approaches to determine how the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and carry a firearm, how the First Amendment protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion, and whether the Due Process Clause protects reproductive autonomy, among other questions.

Much scholarship and popular commentary surrounding THT portrays the methodology as sui generis: presenting unique analytical challenges and impervious to direct comparison to existing doctrinal approaches. However, the jurist most …

Defining The Field Of Judicial Administration, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

This Keynote address, as part of a symposium on "Theorizing the Judicial Process," aims to make a case for the field of judicial administration and to define the field more generally. Specifically, it seeks to raise the organizing questions of the field and to note the kind of work--descriptive, empirical, and theoretical--that is needed to answer them. The hope is to map out a collective research agenda for courts scholars to pursue into the future for the benefit of the academy and judiciary, both.

Litigating Climate Vulnerability: Climate Change Reparations In Global Jurisprudence And Empirical Results From The Notre Dame Climate Change Reparations Dataset, Diane A. Desierto, Anibal Perez-Linan, Faisal Yamil Meneses, Yuta Inada, Rachael Degaugh, Andrew Marciano

Journal Articles

From the article

The global surge in climate change litigation provokes inquiry into the nature, frequency, and scope of climate change reparations that international, regional, and national courts, as well as arbitral tribunals and other adjudicative bodies such as UN treaty body mechanisms, determine to be adequate, both on legal merits as well as intrinsic claims of justice, for the resolution of disputes brought by climate vulnerable persons, groups, and constituencies against States, multinational corporations, and other actors. Our findings from the Notre Dame Climate Change Reparations Dataset reveal a broad spectrum of pecuniary and non-pecuniary reparations being adjudicated in …

Administering Presidential Elections And Counting Electoral Votes After Trump V. Anderson, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

In the landmark case Trump v. Anderson, the Supreme Court unanimously held that states lack the unilateral power to exclude presidential candidates from the ballot on the basis of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. But while the Court was united in its essential holding, the Justices fractured in their reasoning, leaving significant questions about Congress's role in enforcing Section 3 against presidential candidates.

This Article examines the fault lines in Trump v. Anderson and analyzes how Congress's power to count electoral votes under the Twelfth Amendment intersects with its authority to enforce Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. …

Judicial Accountability, Anya Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

Judicial decisions are moving ever more authority over regulatory statutes away from agencies and to courts instead. One justification offered for this power transfer: agencies lack the accountability of courts. This Article takes up that claim, assessing the institutions’ relative capacities for accountability in their authoritative interpretations of regulatory statutes—agency regulations and court rulings. I take accountability to involve actors undertaking reasoned decisionmaking grounded in publicly recognized values and facts and justifying their decisions to others who can evaluate, influence, or override those judgments. Accountability thus involves a give and take: it gives an account of government reasoning to a …

When Accomodation Bars Access To Justice: Implications Of Video Remote Interpreting In Legal Settings, Quincy Craft Faber

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

History's Identity Crisis, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

Lower court judges across the country are struggling to manage the Supreme Court’s new “history and tradition” test that applies to Second Amendment challenges. This Article articulates one fundamental reason for the struggle: nobody is quite sure what a judge is actually doing when she evaluates claims about what happened in the past. Is it traditional legal reasoning— weighing evidence and looking for patterns? Is it fact-finding of the sort we think expert historians should testify about—conveying to a trial judge the best evidence we have about the purpose of colonial gun laws? Or is it a different sort of …

Assembling Pieces Of Accountability For The Srebrenica Genocide, Annick Pijnenburg, Nataša Nedeski

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

The Srebrenica genocide has been the subject of multiple legal proceedings against various actors before different courts, at both the national and international level. Amongst others, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has sentenced various individual perpetrators, the International Court of Justice has ruled on the responsibility of the Serbian state, and Dutch courts have been asked to rule on the liability of the Dutch state and the United Nations. This raises the following question: to what extent have multiple adjudicatory mechanisms across legal regimes managed to deliver accountability for the Srebrenica genocide and what are the remaining …

Ghost Guns: A Case Study On The Tension Between Public Exigencies And Statutory Construction, Bradley Krause

Catholic University Law Review

Administrative agencies often navigate public policy issues while simultaneously handling complex and highly technical matters. When facing a public emergency, how should courts interpret these agencies’ authorizing statutes? What rules of thumb exist to guide the courts? This Comment answers these questions through a case study on ongoing litigation pertaining to a recent ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) regulation. The regulation, targeted towards ghost guns (also known as “privately manufactured firearms”), seeks to incorporate these weapons within pre-existing definitions in the ATF’s authorizing statute, the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). In spite of challenges to the regulation, …

A Conversation With Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Brett M. Kavanaugh, J. Joel Alicea

Catholic University Law Review

On Thursday, September 26th, 2024, the Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition at The Catholic University of America hosted a conversation between Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and Professor J. Joel Alicea. This was the inaugural event of the new Center. The conversation covered topics such as constitutional interpretation, the separation of powers, religious liberty, and the Catholic intellectual tradition. This is a transcript of the conversation, and the text appears substantially as it was delivered. The video of the event may be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sKvSwzkmqo.

All’S “Fair” In Love & Copyright: Copyright’S Incentivization Of Fiction Through The Second Fair Use Factor & Idea/Expression Dichotomy, Peyton J. Smetana

Catholic University Law Review

Copyright Law is supposed to encourage authors to create works of authorship, both factual and fictional. However, Copyright jurisprudence has developed to only protect expression, and not idea, to ensure the continued dissemination of knowledge. In solidifying this belief, two doctrines—Fair Use and the idea/expression dichotomy—allow for individuals to utilize other works of authorship without it being considered copyright infringement. Though widely used throughout the judicial system, the analysis for both the second Fair Use factor—Nature of the Copyrighted Work—and the idea/expression dichotomy are left without clear guidelines, leaving judges with an insurmountable task of determining what is and is …

Education Within Prisons: The Good And The Bad, Tristan T. Morris

Quest

Independent Study

Research in progress for CRIJ 1301: Introduction to Criminal Justice

Faculty Mentor: Stefanie LeMaire

This manuscript began from a response to a discussion prompt in my Introduction to Criminal Justice course where students were asked to discuss some of the issues facing inmates upon release from incarceration. Tristan completed outside research on the relationship between education and recidivism among incarcerated individuals. More specifically, she wanted to discuss the barriers to successful reintegration and programs that have been introduced to address these concerns. Most offenders will be released from incarceration, and they will reenter our society. There is a …

State V. Sweatt: An Examination Of The Current Confusion In Fourth Amendment Standing, John Archer Hobson

Maine Law Review

In State v. Sweatt the Maine Law Court held that an owner of gems being sold on consignment in a third party's store has standing under the fourth amendment to contest the seizure of the gems. The movants in Sweatt were the targets of several police searches during October and November of 1980. During these searches the police seized tourmaline gemstones which were alleged to have been stolen from Dale Sweatt's former business partner, and miscellaneous personal items belonging to the Sweatts. Subsequently, the Sweatts moved for suppression and return of all these articles. The superior court granted the movants' …

In Defense Of Civil Juries, Peter W. Culley

Maine Law Review

Criticism of the civil jury system is nothing new. In fact, virtually since its inception the civil jury has been embroiled in controversy. Typically critics argue that: the jury cannot handle the complex or technical case; there is great expense and delay attendant to trial by jury; jury adjudication is of low quality; verdicts rendered by different juries in cases involving similar facts often appear inconsistent. Recently, Justice Donald Alexander of the Maine Superior Court stated that "[t]he civil jury system has outlived its usefulness." In support of his basic premise that the civil jury system is merely an historical …

Cyr V. Michaud: Correction Of Clerical Errors With Juror Affidavits, William S. Kany

Maine Law Review

Cyr v. Michaud, a civil suit to recover for personal injuries, was tried before a jury and resulted in a verdict which included specific answers to five interrogatories. After a unanimous verdict for the plaintiff was entered and the jury was discharged, the defendant obtained affidavits from all of the jurors which indicated that the jury had made a mistake. The trial court rejected a motion to correct the error and the defendant appealed. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, ruled that juror affidavits are not admissible to correct errors in the recording of verdicts. The …