Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Criminal code reform (1)
- Criminal law politics (1)
- Drafting (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
-
- Grading offenses (1)
- Inconsistent statutory language (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Limiting judicial discretion (1)
- Mandatory minimum sentences (1)
- Moral credibility (1)
- Offense grading (1)
- Pennsylvania criminal law (1)
- Pragmatism (1)
- Proportional punishment (1)
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1)
- Statutory Interpretation (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Textualism (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Report On Offense Grading In Pennsylvania, Paul H. Robinson, Criminal Law Research Group, University Of Pennsylvania Law School
Report On Offense Grading In Pennsylvania, Paul H. Robinson, Criminal Law Research Group, University Of Pennsylvania Law School
All Faculty Scholarship
The Pennsylvania Legislature's Senate Judiciary Committee and House Judiciary Committee jointly commissioned this study of the criminal offense grading scheme contained in Pennsylvania criminal statutes. This Final Report, which was presented to a joint session of the two Committees on December 15, 2009, examines the extent to which current Pennsylvania law defines offenses with offense grades that are inconsistent with the relative seriousness of the offense as compared to other offenses, based upon an empirical survey of Pennsylvania residents. It also examines whether some offenses include within a single grade forms of conduct of very different degrees of seriousness, for …
Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Sensible Pragmatism In Federal Jurisdictional Policy, Tobias Barrington Wolff
Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Sensible Pragmatism In Federal Jurisdictional Policy, Tobias Barrington Wolff
All Faculty Scholarship
This article, written as part of a symposium celebrating the work of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the occasion of her fifteenth year on the Supreme Court, examines the strain of sensible legal pragmatism that informs Justice Ginsburg's writing in the fields of Civil Procedure and Federal Jurisdiction. Taking as its point of departure the Supreme Court's decision in City of Chicago v. International College of Surgeons, in which Ginsburg dissented, the article develops an argument against strict textualism in federal jurisdictional analysis. In its place, the article urges a purposive mode of interpretation that approaches jurisdictional text with a …