Law Commons^™

U.S. Senate Confirms Judge Doris Pryor ’03 To Seventh Circuit, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

The United States Senate on Monday (Dec. 5) confirmed an Indiana University Maurer School of Law alumna to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The confirmation of the Hon. Doris L. Pryor, who earned her law degree from the Law School in 2003, was historic.

Dean’S Desk: The Iu Maurer School Of Law And The Indiana Supreme Court, Christiana Ochoa

Christiana Ochoa (7/22-10/22 Acting; 11/2022-)

On Nov. 1, my first day as the 17th dean of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law, I attended the robing ceremony for Derek Molter, Indiana’s 111th Supreme Court justice. This public ceremony was an opportunity for those in attendance to celebrate Justice Molter’s formal swearing in, which had occurred privately on Sept. 1. For the IU Maurer School of Law, it was also an opportunity to celebrate Justice Molter joining three other IU Maurer alumni on the five-person court.

Established in 1816, the court precedes our law school by about 30 years. Still, for most of Indiana’s history, …

Case Files From The Late Hon. Michael S. Kanne Donated To The Jerome Hall Law Library, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

The case files of the late Judge Michael S. Kanne have been donated to the Indiana University Maurer School of Law’s Jerome Hall Law Library.

Kanne, a 1968 graduate of the Law School, served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from 1987 up until his death in June 2022. Prior to his elevation to the Seventh Circuit, Judge Kanne served on the bench of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Indiana.

Judge Kanne’s files span the entirety of his service on the Seventh Circuit, and contain papers regarding opinions, concurrences, and dissents …

Managing Judicial Discretion: Qualified Immunity And Rule 12(B)(6) Motions, Zachary R. Hart

Indiana Law Journal

Qualified immunity is a judicially created doctrine that shields government officials from personal liability for civil damages. Courts applying the doctrine, which is heavily dependent on the facts of the case, must determine whether the government officials’ conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known. This inquiry is discretionary as judges must determine if the alleged violation was “clearly established,” a term that the Supreme Court has defined in conflicting ways. Moreover, when federal judges conduct the qualified immunity inquiry at the Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss stage, their decision is …

Alumna Doris Pryor, ’03, Nominated To Seventh Circuit, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

President Joe Biden announced three judicial nominees on May 25, including the Hon. Doris L. Pryor—a 2003 graduate of the Maurer School of Law—to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The Hon. Jed Rakoff To Serve As 2022 Commencement Speaker, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

No abstract provided.

Aggregate Stare Decisis, Kiel Brennan-Marquez

Indiana Law Journal

The fate of stare decisis hangs in the wind. Different factions of the Supreme Court are now engaged in open debate—echoing decades of scholarship—about the doctrine’s role in our constitutional system. Broadly speaking, two camps have emerged. The first embraces the orthodox view that stare decisis should reflect “neutral principles” that run orthogonal to a case’s merits; otherwise, it will be incapable of keeping the law stable over time. The second argues that insulating stare decisis from the underlying merits has always been a conceptual mistake. Instead, the doctrine should focus more explicitly on the merits—by diagnosing the magnitude of …

Maurer School Of Law To Host Court Of Appeals Argument, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

No abstract provided.

Overstepping: U.S. Immigration Judges And The Power To Develop The Record, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In 1952, Congress established a new federal position to be filled by “special inquiry officers” charged with overseeing deportation cases. These immigration judges—as they eventually came to be called—were assigned to work within the executive branch, namely, the Department of Justice, and they were to be answerable ultimately to a political appointee, the attorney general. Importantly, they received specific statutory authority allowing them to “develop the record” during an immigration case. This power enabled immigration judges to assemble evidence and call, “interrogate, examine, and cross‑examine . . . any witnesses.”

Given that many immigrants who appear in immigration court do …

Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently issued her first majority-led immigration opinion in Patel v. Garland (2022). As background, some immigrants looking to avoid deportation may apply for what is called “discretionary relief’ (e.g., asylum or adjustment of status) initially in an immigration court and then, if they lose, at the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). These immigration forums fall under the Department of Justice. Prior to Patel, immigrants who lost at the BIA could then ask a federal circuit court to review the factual findings of their case. Now, after Justice Barrett’s decision, Article III review is no longer available …