Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Judicial Retention Elections, The Rule Of Law, And The Rhetorical Weaknesses Of Consequentialism, Todd E. Pettys
Judicial Retention Elections, The Rule Of Law, And The Rhetorical Weaknesses Of Consequentialism, Todd E. Pettys
Todd E. Pettys
From Alaska to Florida, the 2010 election season brought the nation an unprecedented number of organized campaigns aimed at denying retention to judges who had ruled in ways that some voters found objectionable. Judges in those and other retention-election states can no longer rest comfortably on the assumption that voters will routinely exempt them from meaningful scrutiny. Anxious judges, state bar officials, and others have responded with a set of deontological and consequentialist arguments aimed at persuading voters not to use retention elections as an opportunity to oust judges who have issued controversial rulings. The deontological arguments posit that ousting …
Judicial Discretion In Constitutional Cases, Todd E. Pettys
Judicial Discretion In Constitutional Cases, Todd E. Pettys
Todd E. Pettys
A damaging dichotomy is hindering the nation’s ability to talk intelligently and constructively about the constitutional work of the courts. The “legitimacy dichotomy” holds that, when adjudicating constitutional disputes, judges either obey the sovereign people’s determinate constitutional instructions or illegitimately trump the sovereign people’s value judgments with their own. The legitimacy dichotomy leaves little or no room for the possibility that an array of conflicting interpretations of the Constitution might be reasonably available to a judge; it leaves little or no room, in other words, for judicial discretion. This article begins by examining the legitimacy dichotomy from three different vantage …
Sodom's Shadow: The Uncertain Line Between Public And Private Morality, Todd E. Pettys
Sodom's Shadow: The Uncertain Line Between Public And Private Morality, Todd E. Pettys
Todd E. Pettys
In citizens’ debates about issues of public policy, we frequently encounter what this Article calls the divine accountability thesis—the controversial claim that the divine realm will punish a city, state, or nation unless it performs or proscribes certain forms of conduct. Many of us reject that claim, but its persistent usage in numerous societies over the past five thousand years teaches us a great deal about citizens’ political self-conceptions. This Article begins by arguing that the divine accountability thesis illustrates human beings’ deeply ingrained tendency to regard their political communities as discrete moral entities, individually deserving of punishment or reward. …
Popular Constitutionalism And Relaxing The Dead Hand: Can The People Be Trusted?, Todd E. Pettys
Popular Constitutionalism And Relaxing The Dead Hand: Can The People Be Trusted?, Todd E. Pettys
Todd E. Pettys
A growing number of constitutional scholars are urging the nation to rethink its commitment to judicial supremacy. Popular constitutionalists argue that the American people, not the courts, hold the ultimate authority to interpret the Constitution’s many open-ended provisions whose meanings are reasonably contestable. This Article defends popular constitutionalism on two important fronts. First, using originalism as a paradigmatic example of the ways in which courts frequently draw constitutional meaning from sources rooted deep in the past, the Article contends that defenders of judicial supremacy still have not persuasively responded to the familiar dead-hand query: Why should constitutional meanings that prevailed …
The Immoral Application Of Exclusionary Rules, Todd E. Pettys
The Immoral Application Of Exclusionary Rules, Todd E. Pettys
Todd E. Pettys
In both civil and criminal cases today, judges routinely withhold relevant evidence from jurors, fearing that jurors would use it in an irrational or legally impermissible manner. Forcing jurors to take responsibility for a verdict based upon a government-screened pool of evidence stands in sharp contrast to the way we ordinarily think about government efforts to withhold potentially useful information from citizens faced with important decisions. The First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of speech, for example, reflects a moral judgment that the government offends its citizens’ deliberative autonomy when it restricts speech based upon fears about what that speech …
Evidentiary Relevance, Morally Reasonable Verdicts, And Jury Nullification, Todd E. Pettys
Evidentiary Relevance, Morally Reasonable Verdicts, And Jury Nullification, Todd E. Pettys
Todd E. Pettys
In Old Chief v. United States, the Supreme Court stated that evidence offered by the Government in a criminal case has “fair and legitimate weight” if it tends to show that a guilty verdict would be morally reasonable. This Article focuses on that proposition. First, it discusses the ways in which Old Chief’s analysis rests upon a broadened understanding of evidentiary relevance. Second, it argues that significant theoretical difficulties impede any effort to determine whether evidence tends to show that a guilty verdict would be morally reasonable. Third, it argues that adopting Old Chief’s conception of relevance would necessitate significant …