Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Supreme Court (5)
- Education (3)
- Judicial decisionmaking (3)
- Reform (3)
- Statutory interpretation (3)
-
- Civil rights (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Criminal justice (2)
- Democracy (2)
- Education reform (2)
- Federal judiciary (2)
- First Amendment (2)
- Free speech (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Legal Realism (2)
- Litigation (2)
- Posner (2)
- Race (2)
- Right (2)
- Textualism (2)
- Agent (1)
- Amendment (1)
- Appellate Body (1)
- Article v (1)
- Balancing (1)
- Balls and Strikes (1)
- Baseball (1)
- Best light (1)
- Book review (1)
- Bureaucracy (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
Articles 1 - 30 of 41
Full-Text Articles in Law
Resurrection, Bassim Al Shaker
Resurrection, Bassim Al Shaker
Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés
No abstract provided.
Self-Evident: Why The Declaration Of Independence Is America’S True Constitution, Chelsea H. Blake
Self-Evident: Why The Declaration Of Independence Is America’S True Constitution, Chelsea H. Blake
Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés
No abstract provided.
American Legal Realism Today: An Idiosyncratic Restatement, Mark Tushnet
American Legal Realism Today: An Idiosyncratic Restatement, Mark Tushnet
Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés
No abstract provided.
An Introduction To American Legal Realism, Noah Hornberger
An Introduction To American Legal Realism, Noah Hornberger
Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés
No abstract provided.
Foreword, Caroline Faye Radell, Udhanth Mallasani
Foreword, Caroline Faye Radell, Udhanth Mallasani
Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés
No abstract provided.
Are They All Textualists Now?, Austin Peters
Are They All Textualists Now?, Austin Peters
Northwestern University Law Review
Recent developments at the U.S. Supreme Court have rekindled debates over textualism. Missing from the conversation is a discussion of the courts that decide the vast majority of statutory interpretation cases in the United States—state courts. This Article uses supervised machine learning to conduct the first-ever empirical study of the statutory interpretation methods used by state supreme courts. In total, this study analyzes over 44,000 opinions from all fifty states from 1980 to 2019.
This Article establishes several key descriptive findings. First, since the 1980s, textualism has risen rapidly in state supreme court opinions. Second, this rise is primarily attributable …
Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum
Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum
Northwestern University Law Review
In three recent cases, the constitutional concepts of history and tradition have played important roles in the reasoning of the Supreme Court. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization relied on history and tradition to overrule Roe v. Wade. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen articulated a history and tradition test for the validity of laws regulating the right to bear arms recognized by the Second Amendment. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District looked to history and tradition in formulating the test for the consistency of state action with the Establishment Clause.
These cases raise important questions about …
The Misunderstood History Of Textualism, Tara Leigh Grove
The Misunderstood History Of Textualism, Tara Leigh Grove
Northwestern University Law Review
This Article challenges widespread assumptions about the history of textualism. Jurists and scholars have sought for decades to distinguish “modern textualism” from the so-called “plain meaning school” of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries—an approach that both textualists and non-textualists alike have long viewed as improperly “literal” and “wooden.” This Article shows that this conventional historical account is incorrect. Based on a study of statutory cases from 1789 to 1945 that use the term “plain meaning” or similar terms, this Article reveals that, under the actual plain meaning approach, the Supreme Court did not ignore context but looked to …
Consequences And The Supreme Court, Aaron Tang
Consequences And The Supreme Court, Aaron Tang
Northwestern University Law Review
May the Supreme Court consider consequences when it decides the hard cases that divide us? The conventional wisdom is that it may not. Scholars have argued, for example, that consequentialism is a paradigmatic “anti-modal” form of reasoning at the Court. And the Court itself has declared that “consequences cannot change our understanding of the law.”
This Article presents evidence of a possible shift in the standard account. Although many kinds of consequentialist arguments remain forbidden, such as naked judicial efforts to maximize social utility, a particular form of consequentialism is now surprisingly common when the Supreme Court confronts hard cases. …
The Counterdemocratic Difficulty, Aziz Z. Huq
The Counterdemocratic Difficulty, Aziz Z. Huq
Northwestern University Law Review
Since the 2020 elections, debate about the Supreme Court’s relationship with the mechanisms of national democracy has intensified. One important thread of that debate focuses critically on the possibility of a judicial decision flipping a presidential election or thwarting the will of national majorities respecting progressive legislation, and pushes concerns about the Court’s effect on national democracy. A narrow focus on specific interventions, however, does not exhaust the subtle and consequential ways in which the Court influences whether and how the American democratic system thrives or fails. A narrow focus is partial because it construes democracy as merely the aggregation …
Copyright And Federalism: Why State Waiver Of Sovereign Immunity Is The Best Remedy For State Copyright Infringement, Leroy J. Ellis V
Copyright And Federalism: Why State Waiver Of Sovereign Immunity Is The Best Remedy For State Copyright Infringement, Leroy J. Ellis V
Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property
When a photographer intentionally takes a picture of a subject, or a writer puts a story to paper, the resulting works are protected by copyright. That protection is bolstered after the authors register their works with the Copyright Office. All private parties, from individuals to corporations, can be sued for infringing on the work should they use it without pay or permission.
However, what happens when the infringer is not a private party? What happens when the state or a state entity is the infringer? What happens when a public university decides to use a copyright owner’s work without pay …
The Fourth Amendment And The Problem Of Social Cost, Thomas P. Crocker
The Fourth Amendment And The Problem Of Social Cost, Thomas P. Crocker
Northwestern University Law Review
The Supreme Court has made social cost a core concept relevant to the calculation of Fourth Amendment remedies but has never explained the concept’s meaning. The Court limits the availability of both the exclusionary rule and civil damages because of their “substantial social costs.” According to the Court, these costs primarily consist of letting the lawbreaker go free by excluding evidence or deterring effective police practices that would lead to more criminal apprehension and prosecution. But recent calls for systemic police reform by social movements have a different view of social cost. So too do calls for reforming qualified immunity. …
Pure Privacy, Jeffrey Bellin
Pure Privacy, Jeffrey Bellin
Northwestern University Law Review
In 1890, Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis began a storied legal tradition of trying to conceptualize privacy. Since that time, privacy’s appeal has grown beyond those authors’ wildest expectations, but its essence remains elusive. One of the rare points of agreement in boisterous academic privacy debates is that there is no consensus on what privacy means.
The modern trend is to embrace the ambiguity. Unable to settle on boundaries, scholars welcome a broad array of interests into an expanding theoretical framework. As a result, privacy is invoked in debates about COVID-19 contact tracing, police body cameras, marriage equality, facial recognition, …
Stepification, Mitchell Chervu Johnston
Stepification, Mitchell Chervu Johnston
Northwestern University Law Review
Multistep tests pervade the law to the point that they appear to be a fundamental feature of legal reasoning. Famous doctrines such as Chevron or qualified immunity take this form, as do more obscure doctrinal formulas. But surprisingly, these doctrinal formulations as a class are relatively new. The reality is that the intellectual moment that gave rise to Chevron was one in which multiple older doctrines that relied on multifactor balancing were replaced by new tests formulated as multistep inquiries in which each step was a discrete inquiry.
This Article provides the first historical and normative account of this phenomenon—which …
City Of Los Angeles V. Lyons: How Supreme Court Jurisprudence Of The Past Puts A Chokehold On Constitutional Rights In The Present, Peter C. Douglas
City Of Los Angeles V. Lyons: How Supreme Court Jurisprudence Of The Past Puts A Chokehold On Constitutional Rights In The Present, Peter C. Douglas
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
The United States today has refocused its attention on its continuing struggles with civil rights and police violence—struggles that have always been present but which come to the forefront of the collective consciousness at inflection points like the current one. George Floyd—and uncounted others—die at the hands of the police, and there is, justifiably, outrage and a search for answers. Although the reasons why Black and Brown people are disproportionally subject to unconstitutional police violence are manifold, one reason lies in the Supreme Court’s 1983 decision in City of Los Angeles v. Lyons. While many scholars have criticized the Burger …
Racialized Tax Inequity: Wealth, Racism, And The U.S. System Of Taxation, Palma Joy Strand, Nicholas A. Mirkay
Racialized Tax Inequity: Wealth, Racism, And The U.S. System Of Taxation, Palma Joy Strand, Nicholas A. Mirkay
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
This Article describes the connection between wealth inequality and the increasing structural racism in the U.S. tax system since the 1980s. A long-term sociological view (the why) reveals the historical racialization of wealth and a shift in the tax system overall beginning around 1980 to protect and exacerbate wealth inequality, which has been fueled by racial animus and anxiety. A critical tax view (the how) highlights a shift over the same time period at both federal and state levels from taxes on wealth, to taxes on income, and then to taxes on consumption—from greater to less progressivity. Both of these …
The Pursuit Of Comprehensive Education Funding Reform Via Litigation, Lisa Scruggs
The Pursuit Of Comprehensive Education Funding Reform Via Litigation, Lisa Scruggs
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
Panel Discussion: The Right To Education: With Liberty, Justice, And Education For All?
Panel Discussion: The Right To Education: With Liberty, Justice, And Education For All?
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
A Class Action Lawsuit For The Right To A Minimum Education In Detroit, Carter G. Phillips
A Class Action Lawsuit For The Right To A Minimum Education In Detroit, Carter G. Phillips
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
If An Interpreter Mistranslates In A Courtroom And There Is No Recording, Does Anyone Care?: The Case For Protecting Lep Defendants’ Constitutional Rights, Lisa Santaniello
If An Interpreter Mistranslates In A Courtroom And There Is No Recording, Does Anyone Care?: The Case For Protecting Lep Defendants’ Constitutional Rights, Lisa Santaniello
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
Foreword, Daniel B. Rodriguez
Foreword, Daniel B. Rodriguez
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Manifesto Of Democratic Criminal Justice, Joshua Kleinfeld
Manifesto Of Democratic Criminal Justice, Joshua Kleinfeld
Northwestern University Law Review
It is widely recognized that the American criminal system is in a state of crisis, but views about what has gone wrong and how it could be set right can seem chaotically divergent. This Essay argues that, within the welter of diverse views, one foundational, enormously important, and yet largely unrecognized line of disagreement can be seen. On one side are those who think the root of the present crisis is the outsized influence of a vengeful, poorly informed, or otherwise wrongheaded American public and the primary solution is to place control over the criminal system in the hands of …
Three Principles Of Democratic Criminal Justice, Joshua Kleinfeld
Three Principles Of Democratic Criminal Justice, Joshua Kleinfeld
Northwestern University Law Review
This Essay links criminal theory to democratic political theory, arguing that the view of criminal law and procedure known as “reconstructivism” shares a common root with certain culturally oriented forms of democratic theory. The common root is the valorization of a community’s ethical life and the belief that law and government should reflect the ethical life of the community living under that law and government. This Essay then specifies three principles that are entailed by the union of democracy and reconstructivism and that should therefore characterize a democracy’s approach to criminal justice: the “moral culture principle of criminalization,” the “principle …
A Means To An Element: The Supreme Court's Modified Categorical Approach After Mathis V. United States, Michael Mcgivney
A Means To An Element: The Supreme Court's Modified Categorical Approach After Mathis V. United States, Michael Mcgivney
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology
No abstract provided.
Cultural Democracy And The First Amendment, Jack M. Balkin
Cultural Democracy And The First Amendment, Jack M. Balkin
Northwestern University Law Review
Freedom of speech secures cultural democracy as well as political democracy. Just as it is important to make state power accountable to citizens, it is also important to give people a say over the development of forms of cultural power that transcend the state. In a free society, people should have the right to participate in the forms of meaning-making that shape who they are and that help constitute them as individuals.
The digital age shows the advantages of a cultural theory over purely democracy-based theories. First, the cultural account offers a more convincing explanation of why expression that seems …
Multifactoral Free Speech, Alexander Tsesis
Multifactoral Free Speech, Alexander Tsesis
Northwestern University Law Review
This Article presents a multifactoral approach to free speech analysis. Difficult cases present a variety of challenges that require judges to weigh concerns for the protection of robust dialogue, especially about public issues, against concerns that sound in common law (such as reputation), statutory law (such as repose against harassment), and in constitutional law (such as copyright). Even when speech is implicated, the Court should aim to resolve other relevant individual and social issues arising from litigation. Focusing only on free speech categories is likely to discount substantial, and sometimes compelling, social concerns warranting reflection, analysis, and application. Examining the …
The Scrivener’S Error, Ryan D. Doerfler
The Scrivener’S Error, Ryan D. Doerfler
Northwestern University Law Review
It is widely accepted that courts may correct legislative drafting mistakes, i.e., so-called scrivener’s errors, if and only if such mistakes are “absolutely clear.” The rationale is that if a court were to recognize a less clear error, it might be “rewriting” the statute rather than correcting a technical mistake.
This Article argues that the standard is much too strict. The current rationale ignores that courts can “rewrite,” i.e., misinterpret, a statute both by recognizing an error and by failing to do so. Accordingly, because the current doctrine is designed to protect against one type of mistake (false positives) but …
Who Are You Calling Irrational?, Aneil Kovvali
Who Are You Calling Irrational?, Aneil Kovvali
Northwestern University Law Review
Nudges are interventions that encourage people to make particular choices by shaping the context in which the choices are made. These interventions can have major impacts because of quirks in the way that human beings process information. Cass Sunstein places nudges at the core of a regulatory philosophy of “libertarian paternalism,” which suggests that while the government should generally preserve the freedom of citizens to make their own choices, it should also intervene to improve on the choices it deems self-destructive. In Why Nudge?, Sunstein defends libertarian paternalism against John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle, which holds that the government …
The Curious Case Of Cell Phone Location Data: Fourth Amendment Doctrine Mash-Up, Monu Bedi
The Curious Case Of Cell Phone Location Data: Fourth Amendment Doctrine Mash-Up, Monu Bedi
Northwestern University Law Review
Police surveillance ability and information gathering capacity have a dynamic relationship with technology. Greater advancements in technology make it easier for the police to surveil individuals and collect information. This state of affairs leads to heightened concerns over Fourth Amendment protection. This issue has most recently played out in the context of police collecting cell phone location data. Courts disagree on whether and to what extent this data garners Fourth Amendment protection. Underlying this disagreement rests a hitherto overlooked tension between two interrelated Fourth Amendment doctrines—the third-party and the public disclosure doctrines. While both vitiate privacy protection and are commonly …
When Rules Are Made To Be Broken, Zev J. Eigen, David S. Sherwyn, Nicholas F. Menillo
When Rules Are Made To Be Broken, Zev J. Eigen, David S. Sherwyn, Nicholas F. Menillo
Northwestern University Law Review
When do judges follow rules expected to produce unjust results, and when do they intentionally misapply such rules to avoid injustice? Judicial rule-breaking is commonly observed when national dignity and morality are at stake, such as abolitionist judges charged with applying federal fugitive slave laws, or when lives hang in the balance, such as applications of criminal sentencing rules. Much less is understood about judicial rule-breaking in quotidian civil litigation, in spite of the sizeable impact on litigants and potential litigants, as well as the frequency with which judges face such decisions. This Article is the first to theoretically assess …