Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Richmond (40)
- UC Law SF (17)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (14)
- Seattle University School of Law (13)
- University of Maine School of Law (13)
-
- William & Mary Law School (11)
- Pepperdine University (6)
- The University of Akron (6)
- Golden Gate University School of Law (5)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (5)
- Cornell University Law School (4)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (4)
- University of Michigan Law School (4)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (3)
- Roger Williams University (3)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (3)
- St. Mary's University (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (3)
- Brooklyn Law School (2)
- Georgia State University College of Law (2)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (2)
- Marquette University Law School (2)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (2)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Brigham Young University Law School (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Louisiana State University Law Center (1)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Judges (11)
- In memoriam (10)
- Justice Stevens (10)
- Tribute (10)
- Supreme Court (8)
-
- Chief justice (6)
- Law court (6)
- Maine (6)
- Maine supreme judicial court (6)
- Mckusick (6)
- United States. Supreme Court (5)
- Coffin (4)
- Constitution (4)
- Frank m coffin (4)
- Judge (4)
- Judge coffin (4)
- Regulation (4)
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Constitutional law (3)
- Drug abuse (3)
- Due process (3)
- Federal courts (3)
- Federalism (3)
- Judicial ethics (3)
- Judiciary (3)
- Jury (3)
- Law (3)
- Substance abuse (3)
- 19th Amendment (2)
- Publication
-
- University of Richmond Law Review (40)
- The Judges' Book (17)
- Maine Law Review (13)
- Northwestern University Law Review (12)
- Seattle University Law Review (12)
-
- William & Mary Law Review (8)
- Akron Law Review (6)
- Golden Gate University Law Review (5)
- Touro Law Review (5)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (4)
- Cornell Law Review (3)
- Pepperdine Law Review (3)
- Roger Williams University Law Review (3)
- Dalhousie Law Journal (2)
- Georgia State University Law Review (2)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (2)
- Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review (2)
- Marquette Law Review (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy (2)
- The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice (2)
- Utah Law Review (2)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (2)
- Arkansas Law Review (1)
- BYU Law Review (1)
- Brooklyn Journal of International Law (1)
- Brooklyn Law Review (1)
- Canadian Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Child and Family Law Journal (1)
Articles 31 - 60 of 187
Full-Text Articles in Law
Antitrust Changeup: How A Single Antitrust Reform Could Be A Home Run For Minor League Baseball Players, Jeremy Ulm
Antitrust Changeup: How A Single Antitrust Reform Could Be A Home Run For Minor League Baseball Players, Jeremy Ulm
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act to protect competition in the marketplace. Federal antitrust law has developed to prevent businesses from exerting unfair power on their employees and customers. Specifically, the Sherman Act prevents competitors from reaching unreasonable agreements amongst themselves and from monopolizing markets. However, not all industries have these protections.
Historically, federal antitrust law has not governed the “Business of Baseball.” The Supreme Court had the opportunity to apply antitrust law to baseball in Federal Baseball Club, Incorporated v. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs; however, the Court held that the Business of Baseball was not …
It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp
It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp
The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice
Abstract forthcoming.
Scholarship In Review: A Response To David S. Schwartz's The Spirit Of The Constitution: John Marshall And The 200-Year Odyssey Of Mcculloch V. Maryland, Law Review Editors
Scholarship In Review: A Response To David S. Schwartz's The Spirit Of The Constitution: John Marshall And The 200-Year Odyssey Of Mcculloch V. Maryland, Law Review Editors
Arkansas Law Review
We are elated to introduce, and the Arkansas Law Review is honored to publish, this series discussing and applauding David S. Schwartz’s new book: The Spirit of the Constitution: John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. Maryland. Schwartz sets forth meticulous research, coupled with unparalleled insight, into the opinion penned by Chief Justice John Marshall and details the winding path Marshall’s words have traveled over the past 200 years. Schwartz argues that the shifting interpretations of McCulloch, often shaped to satisfy the needs of the time, echoes the true spirit of the Constitution.
Comments On Mcgahn "A Brief History Of Judicial Appointments From The Last 50 Years Through The Trump Administration", Russell Wheeler
Comments On Mcgahn "A Brief History Of Judicial Appointments From The Last 50 Years Through The Trump Administration", Russell Wheeler
William & Mary Law Review Online
Donald McGahn is a respected member of the Washington D.C. legal community, known especially for his expertise in election law. He served as White House counsel in the Trump administration until October 2018 and was a key player in the Trump administration’s judicial appointments process.His article is witty, sometimes revealing, but above all a description, as he sees it, of the decades-long deterioration of the process for Senate confirmation of federal judicial nominees, with some blame assigning. He also provides a few behind-the-scenes looks at Trump administration confirmation battles, and some recommendations for easing contentiousness in— or at least, speeding …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
Jewish Law Perspectives On Judicial Settlement Practice, Shlomo Pill
Jewish Law Perspectives On Judicial Settlement Practice, Shlomo Pill
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
The classic adjudicatory paradigm of opposing attorneys facing off at trial before a judge and jury in order to receive a favorable judgment is an image long past. Increased litigation volume, and the added time and expense of modern litigation has resulted in a rich practice of judges working to broker settlements between litigants in lieu of formal adjudication. Judicial settlement is the subject of much debate, however, and the diverse range of judicial practice in this area reflects the institutional, ethical, and jurisprudential uncertainties we still have regarding the propriety of judges facilitating settlements. This paper offers a new …
Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin
Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin
Pepperdine Law Review
Neither electoral politics, norms preservation, nor modest good government reform can restore the political system because they cannot mitigate the primary threat to the American democracy, Republican radicalism. Those who believe otherwise fail to appreciate how and why radicalism will continue to impede democratic restoration regardless of what happens at the ballot box, misdiagnose the underlying factors that produce and sustain GOP radicalism, and under-estimate the degree of democratic deterioration that has already taken place. Republicans do not need to prevail in every election to forestall the restoration of democracy or to prevent Democrats from governing. The only viable path …
A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz
A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz
Pepperdine Law Review
A Court-packing proposal is imminent. Mainstream Democratic Party Presidential Candidates are already supporting it. The number of Justices on the Supreme Court has been set at nine since 1869, but this is merely a statutory requirement. As soon as Democrats regain control of the Presidency and the Congress, Court-packing will be on the agenda, either expressly or under the guise of Court-reform. Now is the time for the American legal academy to join together to oppose this threat. Court-packing would threaten democracy, destroy the rule of law and undermine judicial independence. It is a pointless and unnecessary reaction born of …
The Kavanaugh Court And The Schechter-To-Chevron Spectrum: How The New Supreme Court Will Make The Administrative State More Democratically Accountable, Justin Walker
Indiana Law Journal
In a typical year, Congress passes roughly 800 pages of law—that’s about a seveninch
stack of paper. But in the same year, federal administrative agencies promulgate
80,000 pages of regulations—which makes an eleven-foot paper pillar. This move
toward electorally unaccountable administrators deciding federal policy began in
1935, accelerated in the 1940s, and has peaked in the recent decades. Rather than
elected representatives, unelected bureaucrats increasingly make the vast majority
of the nation’s laws—a trend facilitated by the Supreme Court’s decisions in three
areas: delegation, deference, and independence.
This trend is about to be reversed. In the coming years, Congress will …
Should Judges Have A Duty Of Tech Competence?, John G. Browning
Should Judges Have A Duty Of Tech Competence?, John G. Browning
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
In an era in which lawyers are increasingly held to a higher standard of “tech competence” in their representation of clients, shouldn’t we similarly require judges to be conversant in relevant technology? Using real world examples of judicial missteps with or refusal to use technology, and drawn from actual cases and judicial disciplinary proceedings, this Article argues that in today’s Digital Age, judicial technological competence is necessary. At a time when courts themselves have proven vulnerable to cyberattacks, and when courts routinely tackle technology related issues like data privacy and the admissibility of digital evidence, Luddite judges are relics that …
Introduction, Jacqueline H. Nguyen
Introduction, Jacqueline H. Nguyen
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit
Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Preface, Kyndal Currie, Leticia Chavez
Preface, Kyndal Currie, Leticia Chavez
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Front Matter
Golden Gate University Law Review
Front Matter includes Masthead, Faculty Advisors, Administration.
Appellate Jurisdiction And The Emoluments Litigation, Adam N. Steinman
Appellate Jurisdiction And The Emoluments Litigation, Adam N. Steinman
Akron Law Review
This article—part of a symposium on federal appellate procedure—addresses questions of appellate jurisdiction that have played an important role in litigation challenging Donald Trump’s conduct under the Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses. When federal trial judges in the District of Columbia and Maryland rejected Trump’s early attempts to dismiss two of these cases, Trump sought immediate relief from the federal courts of appeals rather than allowing the litigation to proceed in the district courts. The lack of a traditional final judgment, however, prompted difficult jurisdictional issues for the D.C. Circuit and the Fourth Circuit.
In both cases, the relationship between appellate mandamus …
Three Ideas For Discretionary Appeals, Bryan Lammon
Three Ideas For Discretionary Appeals, Bryan Lammon
Akron Law Review
Discretionary appeals currently play a limited role in federal appellate jurisdiction. But reformers have long argued for a larger role. And any wholesale reform of the current appellate-jurisdiction system will likely involve additional or expanded opportunities for discretionary appeals. In this essay, I offer three ideas for the future of discretionary appeals—what form they might take in a reformed system of federal appellate jurisdiction and how we might learn about their function. First, remove any limits on the types of decisions that can be certified for immediate appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Second, give parties one opportunity in a …
The Renaissance Of Permissive Interlocutory Appeals And The Demise Of The Collateral Order Doctrine, Michael E. Solimine
The Renaissance Of Permissive Interlocutory Appeals And The Demise Of The Collateral Order Doctrine, Michael E. Solimine
Akron Law Review
Reserving appeals to final judgments has a long history in the federal courts, as do exceptions to that rule. The problem has less been the existence of the exceptions, but rather their scope and application. This article addresses two of those exceptions. One is permissive interlocutory appeals codified in section 1292(b) of the Judicial Code. That exception, requiring the permission of both the trial and appellate courts, has numerous advantages over other exceptions, has been frequently touted as such by the Supreme Court, and has been applied in several recent high-profile cases. In contrast, the collateral order doctrine, an ostensible …
Judicial Disqualification On Appeal, Cassandra Burke Robertson, Gregory Hilbert
Judicial Disqualification On Appeal, Cassandra Burke Robertson, Gregory Hilbert
Akron Law Review
Adjudication by an impartial decision maker is one of the cornerstones of due process. The interest is so fundamental that constitutional due process guards against even the appearance of partiality, and federal judges are statutorily required to disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” Courts and scholars alike have struggled with what it means to “reasonably question” a judge’s impartiality. That question has taken on greater salience in recent years, as deepening partisan divisions have increasingly led parties to express skepticism of judicial neutrality.
When a party files a motion to disqualify a judge …
Signed Opinions, Concurrences, Dissents, And Vote Counts In The U.S. Supreme Court: Boon Or Bane? (A Response To Professors Penrose And Sherry), Joan Steinman
Akron Law Review
Some commentators recently have argued for changes in how United States Supreme Court Justices communicate with everyone except perhaps other Justices of the Supreme Court and the Justices' assistants. Specifically, some commentators have urged that signed opinions and separate opinions, such as concurrences and dissents, stop being published in the official reports. One commentator also has advocated non‑publication of the vote count in Supreme Court decisions. Another has demanded unanimity, as required by due process.
In this piece, I offer my thoughts in response to these proposals.
I argue several reasons to doubt that a prohibition on publication of concurring …
Fixing The Broken System Of Assessing Criminal Appeals For Frivolousness, Andrew S. Pollis
Fixing The Broken System Of Assessing Criminal Appeals For Frivolousness, Andrew S. Pollis
Akron Law Review
This article seeks to end fifty years of confusion over how to proceed when a criminal defendant wants to appeal but appointed counsel sees no basis for doing so.
Practices vary among jurisdictions, but most require counsel to explain the predicament to the court—often at a level of detail that compromises the duty of loyalty to the client. Most also require the court to double-check counsel’s conclusion by conducting its own independent review of the record, thus burdening judges and blurring the important line between judge and advocate. And at no point in this process does the defendant have a …
Virtual Pretrial Jurisdiction For Virtual Contacts, Max D. Lovrin
Virtual Pretrial Jurisdiction For Virtual Contacts, Max D. Lovrin
Brooklyn Law Review
Personal jurisdiction is a threshold requirement for any civil court’s constitutional exercise of adjudicative authority over a defendant, and one of civil procedure’s most fundamental concepts. The Supreme Court is acutely aware of difficulties facing personal jurisdiction doctrine in an evolving world and the need for jurisprudential solutions to those problems. But recent inconsistent trends in Supreme Court personal jurisdiction jurisprudence have served to further complicate the doctrine. Such overcomplication often leads to unpredictability, which both increases expenses for litigants and creates additional work for the already overburdened federal civil docket. This problem is exacerbated when litigation arises out of …
A Survivor's Perspective: Federal Judicial Selection From George Bush To Donald Trump, Leslie H. Southwick
A Survivor's Perspective: Federal Judicial Selection From George Bush To Donald Trump, Leslie H. Southwick
Notre Dame Law Review
Over recent decades, federal judicial selection controversies are worsening in their frequency and intensity. They distort all three branches of government. My particular concern is with federal judicial selection for judgeships below the Olympian heights of those on the United States Supreme Court, namely, the judges on the twelve regional circuit courts of appeals and the ninety-four district courts.
The depth of partisan acrimony over judicial confirmations has placed us in the infernal regions, and we seem to be continuing our descent. Analyzing how we got there is invariably affected by the biases, or more gently, by the perspectives of …
Reflections On The Influence Of Social Media On Judging, Peter D. Lauwers Justice
Reflections On The Influence Of Social Media On Judging, Peter D. Lauwers Justice
Canadian Journal of Law and Technology
This essay examines the influence of social media on judging. While the ethical implications of judges’ engagement in social media have received some scholarly attention, the actual influence of social media on judging has not.1 But it is possible to make some useful observations that might at once seem obvious and disquieting.
This essay is divided into four parts. Part 1 describes the normative judicial disposition. Part 2 examines the psychology of judging. Part 3 asks what could go wrong with the judicial use of social media. Part 4 describes a stance judges might take towards social media.
The Balance Of Safety And Religious Freedom: Allowing Sikhs The Right To Practice Their Religion And Access Courthouses, Karamvir Dhaliwal
The Balance Of Safety And Religious Freedom: Allowing Sikhs The Right To Practice Their Religion And Access Courthouses, Karamvir Dhaliwal
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Rewriting Judicial Recusal Rules With Big Data, Raymond J. Mckoski
Rewriting Judicial Recusal Rules With Big Data, Raymond J. Mckoski
Utah Law Review
Big data affects the personal and professional life of every judge. A judge’s travel time to work, creditworthiness, and chances of an IRS audit all depend on predictive algorithms interpreting big data. A client’s choice of counsel, the precise wording of a litigant’s motion, and the composition of the jury may be dictated by analytics. Touted as a means of bringing objectivity to judicial decision-making, judges have employed big data to determine sentences and to set the amount of restitution in class action cases. Unfortunately, the legal profession and big data proponents have ignored one perplexing problem begging for a …
Table Of Contents And Masthead, Lauren Jacobs
Table Of Contents And Masthead, Lauren Jacobs
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Federal Sentencing: A Judge’S Personal Sentencing Journey Told Through The Voices Of Offenders He Sentenced, Mark W. Bennett
Federal Sentencing: A Judge’S Personal Sentencing Journey Told Through The Voices Of Offenders He Sentenced, Mark W. Bennett
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
Federal sentencing is a tragic mess. Thirty years of conflicting legislative experiments began with high hopes but resulted in mass incarceration. Federal sentences, especially in drug cases, are all too often bone-crushingly severe.
In this Article, the Honorable Mark Bennett, a retired federal judge, shares about his journey with federal sentencing and his strong disagreement with the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines by telling the stories of some of the 400 men and women he sentenced during his twenty-five years as a federal judge.
Securities Exchange Act Section 4e(A): Toothless "Internal-Timing Directive" Or Statute Of Limitation?, Richard E. Brodsky
Securities Exchange Act Section 4e(A): Toothless "Internal-Timing Directive" Or Statute Of Limitation?, Richard E. Brodsky
William & Mary Business Law Review
The Securities and Exchange Commission has a problem, and everyone knows it: its investigative process suffers from excessive delay, which harms both individuals and entity it investigates and its own enforcement program. This problem has long been recognized and complained about, but never remedied.
In 2010, Congress passed a law specifically designed to solve the problem of excessive delay but, the way the SEC has read the law—which has been acquiesced in by the courts and ignored by subsequent Congresses—has rendered it toothless and essentially meaningless. This has been accomplished, first, by the Commission’s cabined interpretation of the purpose of …
The Paradoxical Impact Of Scalia's Campaign Against Legislative History, Stuart Minor Benjamin, Kristen M. Renberg
The Paradoxical Impact Of Scalia's Campaign Against Legislative History, Stuart Minor Benjamin, Kristen M. Renberg
Cornell Law Review
Beginning in 1985, Judge and then Justice Antonin Scalia advocated forcefully against the use of legislative history in statutory interpretation. Justice Scalia's position, in line with his textualism, was that legislative history was irrelevant and judges should avoid invoking it. Reactions to his attacks among Justices and prominent circuit judges had an ideological quality, with greater support from ideological conservatives. In this Article, we consider the role that political party and timing ofjudicial nomination played in circuit judges' use of legislative history. Specifically, we hypothesize that Republican circuit judges were more likely to respond to the attacks on legislative history …