Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (23)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (20)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (16)
- University of Michigan Law School (10)
- American University Washington College of Law (8)
-
- University of Georgia School of Law (5)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (5)
- Notre Dame Law School (4)
- West Virginia University (4)
- Barry University School of Law (3)
- Columbia Law School (3)
- Roger Williams University (3)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (3)
- University of Richmond (3)
- Georgia State University College of Law (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- University of Tennessee College of Law (2)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (23)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (16)
- American Indian Law Review (15)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (8)
- Michigan Law Review (7)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (6)
- Oklahoma Law Review (5)
- Journal Articles (4)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Powell Correspondence (3)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (3)
- West Virginia Law Review (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
- Georgia Law Review (2)
- Georgia State University Law Review (2)
- Powell Speeches (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- Tennessee Law in the News (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- Books (1)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (1)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (1)
- Kentucky Law Journal (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Maryland Law Review Online (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 126
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Supreme Court And Children, Aaron Tang
The Supreme Court And Children, Aaron Tang
Northwestern University Law Review
How do children fare at the Supreme Court? Empirical research on the question is sparse, but existing accounts suggest a disheartening answer. A 1996 study found that children lost more than half of their cases in the Court, and a pair of prominent scholars lamented twenty years later that “the losses in children’s rights cases” had “outpace[d] and overwhelm[ed] the victories.”
In this Article, I present evidence that complicates this understanding. Based on an original dataset comprising 262 Supreme Court decisions between 1953 and 2023, I find that children have prevailed in 62.6% of their cases. This win rate is …
The Foreshadow Docket, Bert I. Huang
The Foreshadow Docket, Bert I. Huang
Faculty Scholarship
Imagine the Supreme Court issuing an emergency order that signals interest in departing from precedent, as if foreshadowing a change in the law. Seeing this, should the lower courts start ruling in ways that also anticipate the law of the future? They need not do so in their merits rulings. That much is clear. Such a signal does not create new binding precedent. Rather, it reflects the Justices’ guess about the future of the law — and what if that guess is wrong?
Yet for a lower court ruling on a temporary stay or injunction, the task seems to call …
The ‘Weaponized’ First Amendment At The Marble Palace And The Firing Line: Reaction And Progressive Advocacy Before The Roberts Court And Lower Federal Courts, Seth F. Kreimer
All Faculty Scholarship
It once seemed that the First Amendment doctrine developed by the Supreme Court stood as a bulwark protecting grassroots struggles for social change. In the twenty-first century, however, particularly since the appointments of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito in 2005, a number of observers have begun to view the Supreme Court’s First Amendment work as a “weaponized” redoubt of reaction.
This sense of the rightward tilt of Supreme Court decisions is rooted in reality. Examining 104 Supreme Court First Amendment cases decided during the 2005–2020 Terms, it turns out that successful litigants are four times as likely to come …
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Article argues that a richer understanding of the nature of law is possible through comparative, analogical examination of legal work and the art of jazz improvisation. This exploration illuminates a middle ground between rule of law aspirations emphasizing stability and determinate meanings and contrasting claims that the untenable alternative is pervasive discretionary or politicized law. In both the law and jazz improvisation settings, the work involves constraining rules, others’ unpredictable actions, and strategic choosing with attention to where a collective creation is going. One expects change and creativity in improvisation, but the many analogous characteristics of law illuminate why …
Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha
Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
During President Trump’s term in office, the Senate confirmed nearly 250 of his federal judicial nominees, including 3 to the Supreme Court of the United States. That number amounts to nearly a third of the federal judiciary’s roughly 800 active members. By and large, the judges nominated by President Trump purport to apply some form of originalist constitutional interpretation or construction, though the subject of originalism featured perhaps most prominently at the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett, whom President Trump nominated in October of 2020 to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Whatever one thinks of the vast literature …
Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso
Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso
Law Faculty Scholarship
Case at a Glance: LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company. Bradley LeDure, a long-time locomotive engineer for Union Pacific, slipped on the slick surface of a locomotive while it was idle but powered on, seriously injuring himself. If Union Pacific violated safety regulations under the Locomotive Inspection Act, then it would be negligent per se. But that theory of liability is only available if the locomotive was in use at the time of the accident. The case presents a question of statutory interpretation of the term use.
The Supreme Court Needs Diversity In More Ways Than One, Benjamin H. Barton
The Supreme Court Needs Diversity In More Ways Than One, Benjamin H. Barton
Tennessee Law in the News
Professor Barton recently authored an op-ed, "The Supreme Court Needs Diversity in More Ways Than One," which ran in the January 30th edition of the The Wall Street Journal. The piece is based on his new book The Credentialed Court.
How Practices Make Principles, And How Principles Make Rules, Mitchell N. Berman
How Practices Make Principles, And How Principles Make Rules, Mitchell N. Berman
All Faculty Scholarship
The most fundamental question in general jurisprudence concerns what makes it the case that the law has the content that it does. This article offers a novel answer. According to the theory it christens “principled positivism,” legal practices ground legal principles, and legal principles determine legal rules. This two-level account of the determination of legal content differs from Hart’s celebrated theory in two essential respects: in relaxing Hart’s requirement that fundamental legal notions depend for their existence on judicial consensus; and in assigning weighted contributory legal norms—“principles”—an essential role in the determination of legal rights, duties, powers, and permissions. Drawing …
No [Concrete] Harm, No Foul? Article Iii Standing In The Context Of Consumer Financial Protection, Annefloor J. De Groot
No [Concrete] Harm, No Foul? Article Iii Standing In The Context Of Consumer Financial Protection, Annefloor J. De Groot
Georgia Law Review
In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Court held that a bare procedural violation of a federal consumer protection statute is not enough to satisfy Article III’s standing requirement because the alleged injury is not sufficiently concrete. This decision resulted in a sizeable circuit split regarding standing under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, with some circuit courts interpreting the holding as narrowing the scope of standing for consumer protection claims, and others maintaining a broader interpretation, allowing plaintiffs to obtain redress for violations of consumer financial protections laws.
In its 2021 ruling in …
Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli
Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
To Trust Or Not To Trust: Native American Healthcare Improvement In The Supreme Court’S Hands, Katherine Graham
To Trust Or Not To Trust: Native American Healthcare Improvement In The Supreme Court’S Hands, Katherine Graham
Georgia Law Review
The United States federal government’s relationship with Native American tribes has long been tenuous. Despite years of unjust and inhumane treatment of Native Americans by the government, Congress has attempted to rectify or limit the government’s harm to Native American people but has fallen short of upholding all agreements intended to improve United States-tribal relations. In particular, the government has not always followed treaties between the government and tribes, and the United States Supreme Court has failed to protect Native American rights in many cases. Central to this issue is the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie, in which the United …
Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan
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 …
Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw
Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw
Articles by Maurer Faculty
This article discusses the issue of whether a victim of caste discrimination based on untouchability can assert a claim of intentional employment discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981. This article contends that there are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is a form of religious discrimination under Title VII. The question of whether caste discrimination is a form of race or national origin discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981 depends upon how the courts apply these definitions to caste discrimination based on untouchability. There are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is recognized within the concept …
Servotronics, Inc. V. Rolls-Royce Plc And The Boeing Company: Brief Of Professor Yanbai Andrea Wang As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Yanbai Andrea Wang, Michael H. Mcginley
Servotronics, Inc. V. Rolls-Royce Plc And The Boeing Company: Brief Of Professor Yanbai Andrea Wang As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Yanbai Andrea Wang, Michael H. Mcginley
All Faculty Scholarship
Rather than expressing a view on the issues raised and ably briefed by the parties, amicus submits this brief to inform the Court of the scholarly research she has conducted regarding Section 1782 proceedings since this Court’s seminal decision in Intel. As Section 1782 applications have proliferated, the lower courts have struggled to apply the Intel factors as this Court had envisioned. Especially in the context of Section 1782 applications submitted by parties to an international proceeding (as opposed to those made by the international tribunal itself), lower courts have frequently found themselves unable to analyze and apply the …
How To Restore Balance To Libel Law, Glenn Harlan Reynolds
How To Restore Balance To Libel Law, Glenn Harlan Reynolds
Tennessee Law in the News
No abstract provided.
Curing The First Amendment Scrutiny Muddle Through A Breyer-Based Blend Up? Toward A Less Categorical, More Values-Oriented Approach For Selecting Standards Of Judicial Review, Clay Calvert
UF Law Faculty Publications
This Article argues that the United States Supreme Court should significantly alter its current categorical approach for discerning standards of judicial review in free-speech cases. The present system should become nondeterminative and be augmented with a modified version of Justice Stephen Breyer’s long-preferred proportionality framework. Specifically, the Article’s proposed tack fuses facets of today’s policy, which largely pivots on distinguishing content-based laws from content-neutral laws and letting that categorization determine scrutiny, with a more nuanced, values-and-interests methodology. A values-and-interests formula would allow the Court to climb up or down the traditional ladder of scrutiny rungs – strict, intermediate or rational …
Propertizing Fair Use, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky
Propertizing Fair Use, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky
All Faculty Scholarship
In its current form, fair use doctrine provides a personal defense that applies narrowly to the specific use by the specific user. The landmark case of Google v. Oracle, currently pending before the Supreme Court, illustrates why this is problematic. Even if the Court were to rule that Google’s use of Oracle’s Java API’s was fair, the ruling would not protect the numerous parties that developed Java applications for the Android operating system; it would only shelter Google and Google’s particular use. This is not an isolated problem; the per use/per user rule cuts across fair uses of copyrighted …
Presidential Progress On Climate Change: Will The Courts Interfere With What Needs To Be Done To Save Our Planet?, Michael B. Gerrard
Presidential Progress On Climate Change: Will The Courts Interfere With What Needs To Be Done To Save Our Planet?, Michael B. Gerrard
Faculty Scholarship
The Biden Administration is undertaking numerous actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition away from fossil fuels as part of the fight against climate change. Many of these actions are likely to be challenged in court. This paper describes the various legal theories that are likely to be used in these challenges, assesses their prospects of success given the current composition of the Supreme Court, and suggests ways to minimize the risks.
Rbg: Nonprofit Entrepreneur, David M. Schizer
Rbg: Nonprofit Entrepreneur, David M. Schizer
Faculty Scholarship
It is exceedingly rare for one person to change the world almost single-handedly, but Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was one of those people. Even before her distinguished judicial career, RBG was a trailblazing advocate for women’s rights during the 1970s. She persuaded the Supreme Court that gender discrimination violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, winning five of the six cases she argued there. To lead this historic effort, RBG served as general counsel of the ACLU and as co-founder and the first director of its Women’s Rights Project from 1972 until she became a judge in 1980. …
Unravelling The Us Presidential Election, Lori A. Ringhand
Unravelling The Us Presidential Election, Lori A. Ringhand
Scholarly Works
One of the most perplexing things about US elections is the extent to which we litigate what in much of the rest of the world are routine nuts and bolts questions about how elections work. I had first-hand experience with this during the 2000 presidential election when I was living in the UK. Why, I constantly was asked, is the US Supreme Court deciding your presidential election?
It’s a good question, and also a timely one given how the current presidential election is unfolding.
Steiner V. Utah: Designing A Constitutional Remedy, Michael S. Knoll, Ruth Mason
Steiner V. Utah: Designing A Constitutional Remedy, Michael S. Knoll, Ruth Mason
All Faculty Scholarship
In an earlier article, we argued that the Utah Supreme Court failed to follow and correctly apply clear U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Steiner v. Utah when the Utah high court held that an internally inconsistent and discriminatory state tax regime did not violate the dormant commerce clause. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court recently declined certiorari in Steiner, but the issue is unlikely to go away. Not every state high court will defy the U.S. Supreme Court by refusing to apply the dormant commerce clause, and so the Court will sooner or later likely find itself facing conflicting interpretations of …
Eighty Years Of Federalism Forbearance: Rationing, Resignation, And The Rule Of Law, Gil Seinfeld
Eighty Years Of Federalism Forbearance: Rationing, Resignation, And The Rule Of Law, Gil Seinfeld
Reviews
Andrew Coan’s book, Rationing the Constitution, offers a novel account of the forces that drive Supreme Court decisions across a wide array of highly controversial, vitally important areas of law. The project is ambitious. It endeavors to improve our understanding of forces that constrain the form and, ultimately, the substance of our constitutional law along each of its major axes: federalism, the separation of powers, and individual rights. I think it succeeds. The book’s central claim—that familiar (but underexplored) institutional constraints and background norms sharply limit the range of choices available to the Court when it is called upon to …
Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert
Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert
UF Law Faculty Publications
Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First Amendment …
The Majoritarian Press Clause, Sonja R. West
The Majoritarian Press Clause, Sonja R. West
Scholarly Works
In early 2018, stories began circulating that something troubling was happening at the United States-Mexico border. The reports claimed that the United States government was separating migrant families and then holding children (as well as adults) by the thousands in crowded, possibly inhumane environments. There were alarming accounts of children who were sick, dirty, hungry, neglected, and sleeping on concrete floors.
Americans, of course, demanded answers: What was happening at these migrant detention centers? Why was it happening? What were the official policies involved? Were the government's actions appropriate? Were they legal? In other words, this was a textbook example …
Correspondence With The Chief Justice Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, William H. Rehnquist, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Correspondence With The Chief Justice Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, William H. Rehnquist, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Powell Correspondence
No abstract provided.
Correspondence With Fellow Associate Justices Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Correspondence With Fellow Associate Justices Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Powell Correspondence
No abstract provided.
Correspondence With The Chief Justice Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Correspondence With The Chief Justice Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Powell Correspondence
No abstract provided.
Panel 6: The Median Justice
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Eric Segall
Panelists: Jonathan Adler, Lee Epstein, and Sasha Volokh
Panel 2: Justice Kennedy's Prose — Style And Substance
Panel 2: Justice Kennedy's Prose — Style And Substance
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Eric Segall
Panelists: Eric Berger, Michael Dorf, and Jamal Greene
Foreword: Abolition Constitutionalism, Dorothy E. Roberts
Foreword: Abolition Constitutionalism, Dorothy E. Roberts
All Faculty Scholarship
In this Foreword, I make the case for an abolition constitutionalism that attends to the theorizing of prison abolitionists. In Part I, I provide a summary of prison abolition theory and highlight its foundational tenets that engage with the institution of slavery and its eradication. I discuss how abolition theorists view the current prison industrial complex as originating in, though distinct from, racialized chattel slavery and the racial capitalist regime that relied on and sustained it, and their movement as completing the “unfinished liberation” sought by slavery abolitionists in the past. Part II considers whether the U.S. Constitution is an …