Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (10)
- Judicial review (4)
- Congress (3)
- Due process (3)
- Fairness (3)
-
- Fifth Amendment (3)
- Juries (3)
- Law reform (3)
- Arbitration (2)
- Arbitrators (2)
- Change (2)
- Collective bargaining (2)
- Discrimination (2)
- Due Process Clause (2)
- Dunlop Commission (2)
- Effectiveness (2)
- Employees (2)
- Employers (2)
- Employment contracts (2)
- Employment discrimination (2)
- Federalism (2)
- History (2)
- Judiciary (2)
- Labor arbitration (2)
- Labor disputes (2)
- Labor unions (2)
- Mandatory arbitration (2)
- Miranda v. Arizona (2)
- Model Penal Code (2)
- National Labor Relations Board (2)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 23 of 23
Full-Text Articles in Law
Swallowing The Apple Whole: Improper Patent Use By Local Rule, Ellisen S. Turner
Swallowing The Apple Whole: Improper Patent Use By Local Rule, Ellisen S. Turner
Michigan Law Review
During patent infringement litigation, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") and the federal district court's local rules govern the parties' pretrial discovery and motion practice. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has adopted the most comprehensive local rules to date covering pretrial procedures in the patent litigation context. The Northern District of California Patent Local Rules ("Local Rules") may come to have a significant impact throughout the federal courts, as it appears that other jurisdictions and commentators are looking to the Local Rules for guidance. For instance, the American Bar Association Section of Intellectual Property …
The Pathological Politics Of Criminal Law, William J. Stuntz
The Pathological Politics Of Criminal Law, William J. Stuntz
Michigan Law Review
Substantive criminal law defines the conduct that the state punishes. Or does it? If the answer is yes, it should be possible, by reading criminal codes (perhaps with a few case annotations thrown in), to tell what conduct will land you in prison. Most discussions of criminal law, whether in law reviews, law school classrooms, or the popular press, proceed on the premise that the answer is yes. Law reform movements regularly seek to broaden or narrow the scope of some set of criminal liability rules, always on the assumption that by doing so they will broaden or narrow the …
A Hybrid Approach To The Use Of Deliberate Ignorance In Conspiracy Cases, Jessica A. Kozlov-Davis
A Hybrid Approach To The Use Of Deliberate Ignorance In Conspiracy Cases, Jessica A. Kozlov-Davis
Michigan Law Review
When hunted, the ostrich is said to run a certain distance and then thrust its head into the sand, thinking, because it cannot see, that it cannot be seen by the hunters. Legal parlance therefore refers to the "ostrich instruction," used when a defendant acts with the awareness of a high probability of the existence of an incriminating fact, but remains deliberately ignorant as to whether the fact actually exists, hoping his ignorance will maintain his innocence. The defendant is like the ostrich - he thinks that if he does not actually see the facts, even though he knows they …
Citizen Participation In Judicial Decision Making: Juries, Lay Judges And Japan, Richard O. Lempert
Citizen Participation In Judicial Decision Making: Juries, Lay Judges And Japan, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
In the late 1920s and 1930s Japan had a jury system. It was suspended in 1943 as a wartime measure, but it had fallen into desuetude long before that. Arguably it was like the Spanish jury, which has several times risen during periods of relative political liberalism or populism and been suppressed during periods of militarism and autocracy. That is, it may be more than a coincidence that use of the Japanese jury fell precipitously during the 1930s as militarism took hold of the Japanese nation. Now the reinstatement of the Japanese jury is again being seriously considered. Similarly it …
Daubert's Backwash: Litigation-Generated Science, William L. Anderson, Barry M. Parsons, Drummond Rennie
Daubert's Backwash: Litigation-Generated Science, William L. Anderson, Barry M. Parsons, Drummond Rennie
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In the 1993 landmark case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court articulated its position on the admissibility of scientific evidence. The Court reasoned that federal judges should rely on the processes scientists use to identify unreliable research, including the process of peer review, to determine when scientific evidence should be inadmissible. In response, lawyers and their clients, seeking to rely on such evidence, have begun funding and publishing their own research with the primary intention of providing support to cases they are litigating. This Article examines the phenomenon of litigation-generated science, how it potentially undermines …
E-Obviousness, Glynn S. Lunney Jr.
E-Obviousness, Glynn S. Lunney Jr.
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
As patents expand into e-commerce and methods of doing business more generally, both the uncertainty and the risk of unjustified market power that the present approach generates suggest a need to rethink our approach to nonobviousness. If courts fail to enforce the nonobviousness requirement and allow an individual to obtain a patent for simply implementing existing methods of doing business through a computer, even where only trivial technical difficulties are presented, entire e-markets might be handed over to patent holders with no concomitant public benefit. If courts attempt to enforce the nonobviousness requirement, but leave undefined the extent of the …
Interpreting Urugual Round Agreements Act Section 102(B)'S Safeguards For State Sovereignty: Reconciling Judicial Independence With The United States Trade Representative's Policy Expertise, Brandon Johnson
Michigan Journal of International Law
In this Note, I address the concerns of one aspect of this academic commentary-the claim that the WTO Agreement may cause a tectonic shift in domestic regulatory power, away from the states and toward the federal government and/or the WTO. I argue that while the concerns about the loss of national sovereignty are exaggerated, there is a very real threat to the sovereignty of the States. Congress was aware of this danger and included a variety of provisions designed specifically to protect state sovereignty from federal encroachment in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), the federal legislation incorporating the WTO …
How International Is 'International' Law?, Kurt Taylor Gaubatz, Matthew Macarthur
How International Is 'International' Law?, Kurt Taylor Gaubatz, Matthew Macarthur
Michigan Journal of International Law
The international legal community posits universality as a central characteristic of modern international law. But there has been little work to assess the degree to which international legal norms are widely shared and incorporated into the foreign policy-making of states. Previous work in this area has attempted to describe the distribution of legal values across cultures. This work has proven contradictory and inconclusive. The epistemic communities literature suggests looking at the distribution of practitioners as an alternative approach for assessing the diffusion of norms and practices. In fact, the community of litigators who practice before the International Court of Justice …
The Effectiveness Of European Community Law With Specific Regard To Directives: The Critical Step Not Taken By The European Court Of Justice, Carla A. Varner
The Effectiveness Of European Community Law With Specific Regard To Directives: The Critical Step Not Taken By The European Court Of Justice, Carla A. Varner
Michigan Journal of International Law
The purpose of this Note is to investigate the European Court of Justice's less expansive treatment of directives as compared to other forms of EC law through its failure to apply horizontal direct effect to directives. More specifically, this Note attempts to answer two questions which arise from the current status of ECJ jurisprudence: First, why has the Court been reluctant to implement horizontal direct effect for directives, especially in light of other actions it has taken to increase the potency of EC law? Second, given the alternative steps taken by the ECJ, is it still necessary to establish horizontal …
The Post-Conflict Transitional Administration Of Kosovo And The Lessons-Learned In Efforts To Establish A Judiciary And Rule Of Law, Wendy S. Betts, Scott N. Carlson, Gregory Grisvold
The Post-Conflict Transitional Administration Of Kosovo And The Lessons-Learned In Efforts To Establish A Judiciary And Rule Of Law, Wendy S. Betts, Scott N. Carlson, Gregory Grisvold
Michigan Journal of International Law
The study of post-conflict Kosovo presents an important opportunity to distill lessons that can provide guidance for future post-conflict, transitional administrations. The lessons-learned from an analysis of any post-conflict setting are many and varied. The goal of this short paper is limited to the identification of key lessons-learned in the effort to reestablish the judiciary and rule of law in post-conflict Kosovo. Even within this limited setting, this paper is not intended to provide exhaustive coverage of the issue. Rather, it is intended to provide the reader with basic information and central themes that are essential to a discussion of …
The Role Of The Presiding Judge In Garnering Respect For Decisions Of International Courts, Jean Allain
The Role Of The Presiding Judge In Garnering Respect For Decisions Of International Courts, Jean Allain
Michigan Journal of International Law
The following study considers the role that should be assumed by a presiding judge to ensure full respect for the rule of law internationally. The foundation for this study lies in an examination of the dispute settlement provisions of the Law of the Sea Convention as well as its mechanism for the settlement of disputes-the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Tribunal was called upon to deliver judgment in the MIV Saiga case. The judgment, along with the primary dissenting opinion, are considered, compared, and analyzed in order to demonstrate the extent to which the judgment is, …
Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker
Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker
Articles
Constitutional law scholars have long observed that many doctrinal rules established by courts to protect constitutional rights seem to "overprotect" those rights, in the sense that they give greater protection to individuals than those rights, as abstractly understood, seem to require.' Such doctrinal rules are typically called "prophylactic" rules.2 Perhaps the most famous, or infamous, example of such a rule is Miranda v. Arizona,' in which the Supreme Court implemented the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination4 with a detailed set of directions for law enforcement officers conducting custodial interrogations, colloquially called the Miranda warnings. 5
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …
Race, Peremptories, And Capital Jury Deliberations, Samuel R. Gross
Race, Peremptories, And Capital Jury Deliberations, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
In Lonnie Weeks's capital murder trial in Virginia in 1993, the jury was instructed: If you find from the evidence that the Commonwealth has proved beyond a reasonable doubt, either of the two alternative aggravating factors], and as to that alternative you are unanimous, then you may fix the punishment of the defendant at death or if you believe from all the evidence that the death penalty is not justified, then you shall fix the punishment of the defendant at life imprisonment ... This instruction is plainly ambiguous, at least to a lay audience. Does it mean that if the …
Gilmer In The Collective Bargaining Context, Theodore J. St. Antoine
Gilmer In The Collective Bargaining Context, Theodore J. St. Antoine
Articles
Can a privately negotiated arbitration agreement deprive employees of the statutory right to sue in court on claims of discrimination in employment because of race, sex, religion, age, disability, and similar grounds prohibited by federal law? Two leading U.S. Supreme Court decisions, decided almost two decades apart, reached substantially different answers to this questionand arguably stood logic on its head in the process. In the earlier case of Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., involving arbitration under a collective bargaining agreement, the Court held an adverse award did not preclude a subsequent federal court action by the black grievant alleging racial discrimination. …
Setting The Record Straight: A Proposal For Handling Prosecutorial Appeals To Racial, Ethnic Or Gender Prejudice During Trial, Andrea D. Lyon
Setting The Record Straight: A Proposal For Handling Prosecutorial Appeals To Racial, Ethnic Or Gender Prejudice During Trial, Andrea D. Lyon
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This article proposes that direct or indirect references to the protected classes of race and/or gender should always be subject to the Chapman v. California "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Once the defendant has shown appeals to racial or gender bias in prosecutorial argument or other conduct during his trial, the burden must shift to the prosecution to show at an immediate hearing outside the presence of the jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this impermissible appeal to bias did not affect the fairness of the defendant's trial. Furthermore, courts must take the examination of the prosecution's proof seriously, …
Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz
Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Lopez v. Monterey County is an odd decision. Justice O'Connor's majority opinion easily upholds the constitutionality of a broad construction of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in language reminiscent of the Warren Court. Acknowledging the "substantial 'federalism costs" resulting from the VRA's "federal intrusion into sensitive areas of state and local policymaking," Lopez recognizes that the Reconstruction Amendments "contemplate" this encroachment into realms "traditionally reserved to the States." Justice O'Connor affirms as constitutionally permissible the infringement that the section 5 preclearance process "by its nature" effects on state sovereignty, and applies section 5 broadly, holding the statute …
Trying To Make Peace With Bush V. Gore (Symposium: Bush V. Gore Issue 2001), Richard D. Friedman
Trying To Make Peace With Bush V. Gore (Symposium: Bush V. Gore Issue 2001), Richard D. Friedman
Articles
The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore, shutting down the recounts of Florida's vote in the 2000 presidential election and effectively awarding the election to George W. Bush, has struck many observers, including myself, as outrageous.' Decisions of the Supreme Court should be more than mere reflections of ideological or partisan preference thinly camouflaged behind legalistic language. It would therefore be pleasant to be able to believe that they are more than that. Accordingly, Judge Richard Posner's analysis,2 in which he defends the result reached by the Court-though not the path by which it got there-is particularly welcome. Though …
Good Faith And The Cooperative Antagonist (Symposium On Revised Article 1 And Proposed Revised Article 2 Of The Uniform Commercial Code), James J. White
Good Faith And The Cooperative Antagonist (Symposium On Revised Article 1 And Proposed Revised Article 2 Of The Uniform Commercial Code), James J. White
Articles
One of Karl Llewellyn's most noted achievements in the Uniform Commercial Code was to impose the duty of good faith on every obligation under the Uniform Commercial Code.1 Some (I am one) have privately thought that imposition of this unmeasurable, undefinable duty was Llewellyn's cruelest trick, but no court, nor any academic writer, has ever been so bold or so gauche as to suggest that good faith should not attend the obligations of parties under the UCC. Notwithstanding this silent indorsement of the duty of good faith, the courts2 and commentators3 have had difficulty in determining what is and what …
The Changing Role Of Labor Arbitration (Symposium: New Rules For A New Game: Regulating Employment Relationships In The 21st Century), Theodore J. St. Antoine
The Changing Role Of Labor Arbitration (Symposium: New Rules For A New Game: Regulating Employment Relationships In The 21st Century), Theodore J. St. Antoine
Articles
A quarter century ago, in a provocative and prophetic article, David E. Feller lamented the imminent close of what he described as labor arbitration's "golden age." I have expressed reservations about that characterization, insofar as it suggested an impending shrinkage in the stature of arbitration. But Professor Feller was right on target in one important respect. Labor arbitration was going to change dramatically from the autonomous institution in the relatively self-contained world of union-management relations which it had been from the end of World War II into the 1970s. When the subject matter was largely confined to union-employer agreements, arbitration …
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
Articles
With the narrowing of Congress' Article I power to regulate interstate commerce and to authorize private suits against states, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with an increasingly important alternative source of power to regulate and police state conduct. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has tightened the doctrinal test for prophylactic legislation based on Section Five. The Court has clarified Section Five's legitimate ends by holding that Congress may enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights only as they are defined by the federal judiciary, and the Court has constrained Section Five's permissible …
Judicial Review Of Member-State Regulation Of Trade Within A Federal Or Quasi-Federal System: Protectionism And Balancing, Da Capo, Donald H. Regan
Judicial Review Of Member-State Regulation Of Trade Within A Federal Or Quasi-Federal System: Protectionism And Balancing, Da Capo, Donald H. Regan
Articles
The topic of this Essay is not one Terry Sandalow has worked on, but he got me started on it by organizing, with Eric Stein, the Bellagio Conference on comparative constitutional economic integration in the United States and the European Community. For that, and for thirty-three years during which he has been an unfailingly stimulating and supportive colleague, Dean, and friend, I am deeply grateful.
From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar
From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar
Articles
Once the Court granted [certiorari in Dickerson] court-watchers knew the hour had come. At long last the Court would have to either repudiate Miranda, repudiate the prophylactic-rule cases [the cases viewing Miranda's requirements as not rights protected by the Constitution, but merely "prophylactic rules"] or offer some ingenious reconciliation of the two lines of precedent. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, doesn't "have to" do anything, as the decision in Dickerson once again reminds us.