Law Commons^™

How Congress Should Fix Personal Jurisdiction, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

Personal jurisdiction is a mess, and only Congress can fix it. The field is a morass, filled with buzzwords of nebulous origin and application. Courts have sought a single doctrine that simultaneously guarantees convenience for plaintiffs, fairness for defendants, and legitimate authority for the tribunal. Caught between these goals, we've let each new fact pattern pull precedent in a different direction, robbing litigants of certainty and blunting the force of our substantive law.

Solving the problem starts with reframing it. Rather than ask where a case may be heard, we should ask who may hear it. If the parties are …

What State Constitutional Law Can Tell Us About The Federal Constitution, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Courts and scholars have long sought to illuminate the relationship between state and federal constitutional law. Yet their attention, like the relationship itself, has largely been one-sided: State courts have consistently adopted federal constitutional law as their own, and scholars have attempted to illuminate why this is, and why it should or should not be so. By contrast, federal courts tend not to look to state constitutional law, even for persuasive authority. Nor have scholars argued at any length that federal courts can or should look to state constitutional law for guidance in answering the many constitutional questions common to …

Which States Have The Best (And Worst) High Courts?, Mitu Gulati, Stephen J. Choi, Eric A. Posner

Faculty Scholarship

This paper ranks the high courts of the fifty states, based on their performance during the years 1998-2000, along three dimensions: opinion quality (or influence as measured by out-of-state citations), independence (or non-partisanship), and productivity (opinions written). We also discuss ways of aggregating these measures. California and Delaware had the most influential courts; Georgia and Mississippi had the most productive courts; and Rhode Island and New York had the most independent courts. If equal weight is given to each measure, then the top five states were: California, Arkansas, North Dakota, Montana, and Ohio. We compare our approach and results with …

Therapeutic Justice In Alaska’S Courts, Teresa W. Carns, Michael G. Hotchkin, Elaine M. Andrews

Alaska Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Discipline And Judicial Independence, Steven Lubet

Law and Contemporary Problems

The question of judicial accountability and independence arises primarily in the context of state courts. When it comes to accountability, it is state judges who must be concerned about threates to their independence.

Judicial Independence And Democratic Accountability In Highest State Courts, Paul D. Carrington

Law and Contemporary Problems

Carrington notes that because judges in trial and intermediate courts are accountable to highest courts, it is the latter that are responsible for keeping the faith with democratic traditions.

Alaska Supreme Court And Court Of Appeals Year In Review 1992, Attila I. Bodi, Debra E. Munsen, James P. Walsh

Alaska Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts, State Courts, And The Constitution: A Rejoinder To Professor Redish, Erwin Chemerinsky

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Parity Reconsidered: Defining A Role For The Federal Judiciary, Erwin Chemerinsky

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.