Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (29)
- Federal Courts (17)
- Courts (16)
- Judges (11)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (9)
-
- United States. Supreme Court (9)
- Federal courts (8)
- Jurisdiction (8)
- Technology & Law (8)
- Technology Applications (7)
- Appellate Courts (6)
- Judicial Power (6)
- Legal Briefs (6)
- Trial Practice (6)
- Appeals (5)
- Book review (5)
- Courtroom Proceedings (5)
- Judicial Process (5)
- Judicial Review (5)
- Legal Evidence (5)
- Pleadings (5)
- Precedents (5)
- State Courts (5)
- Administration of Justice (4)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (4)
- Civil Procedure (4)
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Court Records (4)
- Federal Jurisdiction (4)
- Federalism (4)
- Publication Year
Articles 31 - 60 of 137
Full-Text Articles in Law
Justice Scalia's Other Standing Legacy, Tara Leigh Grove
Justice Scalia's Other Standing Legacy, Tara Leigh Grove
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Judicial Fact-Finding In An Age Of Rapid Change: Creative Reforms From Abroad, Allison Orr Larsen
Judicial Fact-Finding In An Age Of Rapid Change: Creative Reforms From Abroad, Allison Orr Larsen
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Grave Crimes And Weak Evidence: Fact-Finding Evolution In International Criminal Law, Nancy Amoury Combs
Grave Crimes And Weak Evidence: Fact-Finding Evolution In International Criminal Law, Nancy Amoury Combs
Faculty Publications
International criminal courts carry out some of the most important work that a legal system can conduct: prosecuting those who have visited death and destruction on millions. Despite the significance of their work--or perhaps because of it--international courts face tremendous challenges. Chief among them is accurate fact-finding. With alarming regularity, international criminal trials feature inconsistent, vague, and sometimes false testimony that renders judges unable to assess with any measure of certainty who did what to whom in the context of a mass atrocity. This Article provides the first-ever empirical study quantifying fact-finding in an international criminal court. The study shines …
Separating Amicus Wheat From Chaff, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl, Adam Feldman
Separating Amicus Wheat From Chaff, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl, Adam Feldman
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Amicus Machine, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins
The Amicus Machine, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court receives a record number of amicus curiae briefs and cites to them with increasing regularity. Amicus briefs have also become influential in determining which cases the Court will hear. It thus becomes important to ask: Where do these briefs come from? The traditional tale describes amicus briefs as the product of interest-group lobbying. But that story is incomplete and outdated. Today, skilled and specialized advocates of the Supreme Court Bar strategize about what issues the Court should hear and from whom they should hear them. They then “wrangle” the necessary amici and “whisper” to coordinate the message. …
Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Book Review Of Fraudulent Evidence Before Public International Tribunals: The Dirty Stories Of International Law, Nancy Amoury Combs
Book Review Of Fraudulent Evidence Before Public International Tribunals: The Dirty Stories Of International Law, Nancy Amoury Combs
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Rationalizing Cost Allocation In Civil Discovery, A. Benjamin Spencer
Rationalizing Cost Allocation In Civil Discovery, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
A movement is afoot to revise the longstanding presumption that in civil litigation the producing party bears the cost of production in response to discovery requests. An amendment to Rule 26( c )-which took effect in December 2015-makes explicit courts' authority to issue protective orders that shift discovery costs away from producing parties. But this authority is not new; what is new is what may be coming next-an undoing of the producer-pays presumption itself. Thus far, the sentiment to move in this direction has been slightly below the radar, advocated by probusiness interest groups and advocates before the Advisory Committee …
The Trouble With Amicus Facts, Allison Orr Larsen
The Trouble With Amicus Facts, Allison Orr Larsen
Faculty Publications
The number of amicus curiae briefs filed at the Supreme Court is at an all-time high. Most observers, and even some of the Justices, believe that the best of these briefs are filed to supplement the Court’s understanding of facts. Supreme Court decisions quite often turn on generalized facts about the way the world works (Do violent video games harm children? Is a partial birth abortion ever medically necessary?). To answer these questions, the Justices are hungry for more information than the parties and the record can provide. The consensus is that amicus briefs helpfully add factual expertise to the …
Allison Orr Larsen On Intensely Empirical Amicus Briefs And Amicus Opportunism At The Supreme Court, Allison Orr Larsen
Allison Orr Larsen On Intensely Empirical Amicus Briefs And Amicus Opportunism At The Supreme Court, Allison Orr Larsen
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Following Lower-Court Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Following Lower-Court Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
This Article examines the role of lower-court precedent in the US Supreme Court’s decisions. The Supreme Court is rarely the first court to consider a legal question, and therefore the Court has the opportunity to be informed by and perhaps even persuaded by the views of the various lower courts that have previously addressed the issue. This Article considers whether the Court should give weight to lower-court precedent as a matter of normative theory and whether the Court in fact does so as a matter of practice. To answer the normative question, this Article analyzes a variety of potential reasons …
Against Methodological Stare Decisis, Evan J. Criddle, Glen Staszewski
Against Methodological Stare Decisis, Evan J. Criddle, Glen Staszewski
Faculty Publications
Should federal courts give stare decisis effect to statutory interpretation methodology? Although a growing number of legal scholars have answered this question in the affirmative, this Essay makes the case against methodological stare decisis. Drawing on recent empirical studies of Congress’s expectations regarding statutory interpretation, we show that existing knowledge of Congress’s expectations is insufficient to settle on one consistent approach to statutory interpretation. Moreover, Congress has almost certainly changed its expectations over time, and this raises serious problems for methodological stare decisis from the perspective of faithful-agency theories. We argue further that many theories and doctrines of statutory interpretation …
Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
A number of researchers have recently published new measures of the Supreme Court’s behavior in resolving conflicts in the lower courts. These new measures represent an improvement over prior, cruder approaches, but it turns out that measuring the Court’s resolutions of conflicts is surprisingly difficult. The aim of this methodological comment is to describe those difficulties and to establish several conclusions that follow from them. First, the new measures of the Court’s behavior are certainly imprecise and may reflect biased samples. Second, using the Supreme Court Database, which some studies rely on to assemble a dataset of cases resolving conflicts, …
Factual Precedents, Allison Orr Larsen
Factual Precedents, Allison Orr Larsen
Faculty Publications
Lawyers and judges speak to each other in a language of precedents—decisions from cases that have come before. The most persuasive precedent to cite, of course, is an on-point decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. But Supreme Court opinions are changing. They contain more factual claims about the world than ever before, and those claims are now rich with empirical data. This Supreme Court factfinding is also highly accessible; fast digital research leads directly to factual language in old cases that is perfect for arguments in new ones. An unacknowledged consequence of all this is the rise of what I …
Pleading And Access To Civil Justice: A Response To Twiqbal Apologists, A. Benjamin Spencer
Pleading And Access To Civil Justice: A Response To Twiqbal Apologists, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Professor Stephen Yeazell once wrote, ''A society based on the rule of law fails in one of its central premises if substantial parts of the population lack access to law enforcement institutions."" One apparent threat to access to justice in recent years has been the erosion of notice pleading in the federal courts in favor of a plausibility-pleading system that screens out potentially meritorious claims that fail to offer sufficient specificity and support at the pleading stage. But some have questioned whether this purported threat is more perceived than real. Indeed, this doctrinal shift has been defended in several ways …
Reverse Advisory Opinions, Neal Devins, Saikrishna B. Prakash
Reverse Advisory Opinions, Neal Devins, Saikrishna B. Prakash
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen
Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Legal Scholarship Highlight: Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen
Legal Scholarship Highlight: Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Hierarchy And Heterogeneity: How To Read A Statute In A Lower Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Hierarchy And Heterogeneity: How To Read A Statute In A Lower Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
Is statutory interpretation an activity that all courts should perform the same way? Courts and commentators implicitly so conclude. I believe that conclusion is wrong. Statutory interpretation is a court-specific activity that should differ according to the institutional circumstances of the interpreting court. The U.S. Supreme Court is not the model all other courts should emulate.
I identify three kinds of institutional differences between courts that bear on which interpretive methods are appropriate: (1) the court’s place in the hierarchical structure of appellate review, (2) the court’s technical capacity and resources, and (3) the court’s democratic pedigree, particularly as reflected …
Hybridizing Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson
Hybridizing Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Federal jurisdiction – the “power” of the court – is seen as something separate and unique. As such, it has a litany of special effects that define jurisdictionality as the antipode of nonjurisdictionality. The resulting conceptualization is that jurisdictionality and nonjurisdictionality occupy mutually exclusive theoretical and doctrinal space. In a recent Article in Stanford Law Review, I refuted this rigid dichotomy of jurisdictionality and nonjurisdictionality by explaining that nonjurisdictional rules can be “hybridized” with any – or even all – of the attributes of jurisdictionality.
This Article drops the other shoe. Jurisdictional rules can be hybridized, too, and in myriad …
Split Definitive, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Split Definitive, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Popular Media
For the first time in a century, the Supreme Court is divided solely by political party.
The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer
The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Although the Constitution vests the "Judicial Power" of the United States in the Supreme Court and in any inferior courts that Congress establishes, both Congress and the Court have long propounded the traditional view that the inferior courts may be deprived cognizance of some of the cases and controversies that fall within that power. Is this view fully consonant with the history and text of Article III? One possible reading of those sources suggests that the Constitution vests the full Judicial Power of the United States in the inferior federal courts, directly extending to them jurisdiction over matters that Congress …
Do Judicial Elections Facilitate Popular Constitutionalism; Can They?, Nicole Mansker, Neal Devins
Do Judicial Elections Facilitate Popular Constitutionalism; Can They?, Nicole Mansker, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Preservation Obligation: Regulating And Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation In Federal Court, A. Benjamin Spencer
The Preservation Obligation: Regulating And Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation In Federal Court, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
The issue of discovery misconduct, specifically as it pertains to the prelitigation duty to preserve and sanctions for spoliation, has garnered much attention in the wake of decisions by two prominent jurists whose voices carry great weight in this area. In Pension Committee of University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities LLC, Judge Shira A. Scheindlin-of the Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC2 e-discovery casespenned a scholarly and thorough opinion setting forth her views regarding the triggering of the duty to preserve potentially relevant information pending litigation and the standards for determining the appropriate sanctions for various breaches …
The Structural Safeguards Of Federal Jurisdiction, Tara Leigh Grove
The Structural Safeguards Of Federal Jurisdiction, Tara Leigh Grove
Faculty Publications
Scholars have long debated Congress’s power to curb federal jurisdiction and have consistently assumed that the constitutional limits on Congress’s authority (if any) must be judicially enforceable and found in the text and structure of Article III. In this Article, I challenge that fundamental assumption. I argue that the primary constitutional protection for the federal judiciary lies instead in the bicameralism and presentment requirements of Article I. These Article I lawmaking procedures give competing political factions (even political minorities) considerable power to “veto” legislation. Drawing on recent social science and legal scholarship, I argue that political factions are particularly likely …
Precedent, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Catching The Wave: State Supreme Court Outreach Efforts, Rebecca Green
Catching The Wave: State Supreme Court Outreach Efforts, Rebecca Green
Faculty Publications
State supreme courts have begun to grasp the many ways technology can connect the public with courts. This article will review some of the main trends in state supreme courts’ use of the Internet to educate the public about their work.
Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson
Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Justice Souter’s recent retirement from the Court after nearly twenty years presents a unique opportunity to comment on his legacy. No doubt others will eulogize or castigate him for his membership in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey troika, but there is much more to the man and his jurisprudence. Indeed, the danger is that Justice Souter will be pigeonholed into one opinion, an opinion that he wrote early in his Supreme Court career, to the detriment of understanding the complex justice that he was. And what it finds is a justice deeply committed to the fair treatment of the litigants …
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual insufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintiffs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …