Law Commons^™

Constitutional Law—State Employees Have Private Cause Of Action Against Employers Under Family And Medical Leave Act—Nevada Department Of Human Resources V. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003)., Gabriel H. Teninbaum

ExpressO

The Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that non-consenting states are not subject to suit in federal court. Congress may, however, abrogate the states’ sovereign immunity by enacting legislation to enforce the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs, the Supreme Court of the United States considered whether Congress acted within its constitutional authority by abrogating sovereign immunity under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which allows private causes of action against state employers to enforce the FMLA’s family-leave provision. The Court held abrogation was proper under the FMLA and state …

The Function Of The Supreme People’S Court Of Regulating Economy——Re-Evaluation Of The Zhongfu Industry Guarantee Case(最高法院规制经济的功能──再评“中福实业公司担保案”), Meng Hou

Hou Meng

No abstract provided.

How The Supreme Court Regulates Economy: Review On Exterior Coordination Cost（最高人民法院如何规制经济──外部协调成本的考察）, Meng Hou

Hou Meng

No abstract provided.

An Introduction To Lessigian Thought, Russ Taylor

Federal Communications Law Journal

Book Review: Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity, Lawrence Lessig, New York: Penguin Press, 2004, 306 pages.

A review of Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity by Lawrence Lessig. Lawrence Lessig is a frequent commentator and prolific writer on media and communications topics. His body of work touches copyright issues, radio spectrum policy, media ownership issues, and legal ownership and control of the physical platforms that deliver broadband content. In this 2004 publication, he focuses on copyright policy. …

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Complete Issue

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

No abstract provided.

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Problem-Solving Supervision: Specialty Probation For Individuals With Mental Illnesses, John Petrila, Jennifer L. Skeem

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

One of the most important developments in American law over the last decade has been the exponential growth of problem-solving courts. Such courts achieve efficiencies by consolidating certain types of cases before specially designated judges. Additionally, in many instances, problem-solving courts adopt a therapeutic focus by attempting to achieve outcomes (e.g., obtaining treatment for a defendant) that go beyond the traditional goals of the judicial system. A recent commentary in this journal noted that “problem-solving courts generally focus on the underlying chronic behaviors of criminal defendants.” These courts include, but are not limited to drug courts, mental health courts, domestic …

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Cover

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

No abstract provided.

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Court Gazing: Features Of Diversity In The U.S. Supreme Court Building, Hongxia Liu

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

“Diversity is its strength, just as it is the strength of America itself,” wrote Justice Sandra Day O’Connor about the United States Supreme Court.1 The Court’s strength of diversity is manifested in various ways. To its thousands of visitors, the Supreme Court Building itself is perhaps the first and foremost exhibition of that strength of diversity.

In the nation’s highest court, high above the bench, are the figures of 18 historical lawgivers depicted in marble friezes. These 18 lawgivers are of different races and ethnicities, from Hammurabi to Moses to Confucius to John Marshall. They stand parallel, representing diverse legal …

Between Dialogue And Decree: International Review Of National Courts, Robert B. Ahdieh

Faculty Scholarship

Recent years have seen dramatic growth in the number of international tribunals at work across the globe, from the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, to the Claims Resolution Tribunal for Dormant Claims in Switzerland and the International Criminal Court. With this development has come both increased opportunity for interaction between national and international courts and increased occasion for conflict. Such friction was evident in the recent decision in Loewen Group, Inc. v. United States, in which an arbitral panel constituted under the North American Free Trade Agreement found …

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Table Of Contents

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

No abstract provided.

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Racial And Ethnic Bias In The Courts: Impressions From Public Hearings, Elizabeth Neeley

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

Attitudes toward the courts can affect the way individuals perceive their role in the justice system: their willingness to comply with laws, report crimes, file legal suits, serve as jurors, and so on. In short, a positive public perception of the courts is “critical to the maintenance and operation of the judicial system.” Given the import of these perceptions, a substantial body of research has examined the factors that explain differing levels of support for the court system. Although many of these studies examine national samples or examine attitudes toward the U.S. Supreme Court, it is beyond the scope of …

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - The Resource Page

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

No abstract provided.

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - How Useful Is The New Aggressive Driving Legislation?, Victor E. Flango, Ann L. Keith

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

Aggressive driving usually refers to a disregard for others on the road and is distinguished from the more extreme “road rage,” which involves violent, criminal acts. Nevertheless, with an 1,800 reported incidents of violent road behavior involving the use of an automobile in the United States in 1996, it is a national problem requiring attention. Aggressive driving is responsible for more than 27,000 fatalities per year as well as over 3,000,000 injuries, costing over $150 billion dollars.

A survey of 6,000 drivers by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that 60% of the drivers interviewed believed that unsafe …

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Editor's Note

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

With this double issue—and coming issues on jury reform and judicial independence in the trial court—we will be back on schedule by the time of the American Judges Association’s annual conference in October in San Francisco. I have appreciated your patience as our publication schedule has lagged behind the calendar; I have also appreciated the many kind comments we’ve received regarding the quality of the articles you have received.

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - President’S Column, Michael R. Mcadam

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

I have just returned from the annual meeting of the Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judges (CAPCJ) in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory. I must first tell you what a wonderful group of judges I met in Canada. I made many new friends and was treated as an old friend. I later realized that this treatment was not due to my overwhelming personality but to the fact that the AJA is respected by Canadian judges and has a great reputation in Canada. Thus the AJA president is treated as a friend.

Court Review: Volume 40, Issue 3-4 - Smarter Sentencing: On The Need To Consider Crime Reduction As A Goal, Michael Marcus

Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association

In February, 2004, Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski directed a newly created “Public Safety Review Steering Committee” to “look at our public safety system from beginning to end” and to develop “strategies to make the system stronger” wherever it does not sufficiently protect Oregonians. In common with many states, Oregon long ago adopted a modification of the penal code to declare crime reduction among the purposes of sentencing. And in common with many states, Oregon has adopted a sentencing guidelines model that roughly directs sentencing to reflect crime seriousness, criminal history, and prison resources—largely or entirely ignoring crime reduction. Apparently in …

The Iceberg Of Religious Freedom: Subsurface Levels Of Nonestablishment Discourse, Steven Douglas Smith

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This article discusses three levels of disagreement in establishment clause discourse– or what may be called the “lawyerly,” the “constitutive” (or “culture wars”), and the “philosophical” (or perhaps the “theological”) levels. Disagreement at the first of these levels is everywhere apparent in the way lawyers and justices and scholars write and argue; disagreement at the second level is somewhat less obtrusive but still easily discernible; disagreement at the third level is almost wholly beneath the surface. The manifest indeterminacy of lawyerly arguments suggests that in this area, premises are more likely to be derived from favored conclusions, not the other …

The Pluralistic Foundations Of The Religion Clauses, Steven H. Shiffrin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Contemporary Supreme Court interpretations suggest that the religion clauses are primarily rooted in the value of equality. The United States Supreme Court has argued that in the absence of discrimination against religion (or the presence of other constitutional values), there is no violation of the Free Exercise Clause when a statute inadvertently burdens religion. Similarly, equality values have played a strong role in the Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence. Many distinguished commentators have pointed to the equality focus and have argued that it gives insufficient attention to the value of religious liberty. Professor Shiffrin argues that these commentators are right in …

Ubi Jus, Ibi Remedium: The Fundamental Right To A Remedy Under Due Process, Tracy A. Thomas

San Diego Law Review

This essay is part of the 2003 Remedies Forum symposium comprised of international remedies scholars addressing the topic of equitable relief in the fifty years since Brown v. Board of Education. It may be true as other scholars have argued that since the time of Brown, institutional defendants have won at the expense of plaintiffs. Defendants have learned that delay and defiance work. The U.S. Supreme Court has adopted a standard for ordering equitable relief that significantly defers to defendant wrongdoers at the plaintiffs' expense. Epithets of activist courts and judicial legislation have colored the existing scholarship and portrayed remedial …

Yes, Thankfully, Euclid Lives, Charles M. Haara, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

Professors Haar and Wolf reiterate their endorsement of Progressive jurisprudence, as embodied in the Supreme Court's opinion in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., despite Professor Eric Claeys's effort to expose the political theory underlying Progressive legal thought. They highlight problems with Professor Claeys's portrayal of the actual practice of zoning and with his use of history, problems that seriously undercut Professor Claeys's findings regarding the political beliefs of early zoning and planning advocates, the evolution of zoning law in the courts, and the role natural law played in American legal history.

Defining Dicta, Michael Abramowicz, Maxwell Stearns

ExpressO

The doctrine of stare decisis applies only to holdings of past cases, but scholars and courts have paid far more attention to stare decisis doctrine than to the distinction between holding and dicta, particularly in recent years. The lack of attention that the distinction receives may reflect a sense among legal analysts that they know dicta when they see it, but the problem is considerably more analytically complex than it may at first appear. In this Article, Professors Abramowicz and Stearns identify a number of structural problems that may affect whether statements in judicial opinions should be classified as holding …

Towards An Establishment Clause Theory Of Race-Based Allocation After Grutter: Administering Race-Conscious Financial Aid, Maurice R. Dyson

ExpressO

The novel application of the Establishment Clause doctrine by way of analogy to race0based financial aid after Grutter and Grats, while not identical, speaks to real issue of neutrality that is implicit in the debate of administering race-based scholarships that should be truthfully acknowledged. There is no concern about improper university indoctrination of race as the Grutter court has already established race-based diversity as worthy of a compelling state interest. Moreover, there is no concern that a college or university would establish an imprimatur on race-based scholarships merely or solely because it identifies potential candidates meeting specified eligibility criteria which …

Common-Law Compulsory Counterclaim Rule: Creating Effective And Elegant Res Judicata Doctrine, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Even in the absence of an applicable statute or court rule, failure to assert an available counterclaim precludes bringing a subsequent action thereon if granting relief would nullify the judgment in the initial action. This so-called common-law compulsory counterclaim rule emerges from the intuitive principle of claim preclusion that a valid and final judgment generally precludes the defendant from later asserting mere defenses to the claim. The implicit extension of this idea is that once a plaintiff obtains a judgment, the defendant generally cannot bring a new action to undo the judgment by reopening the plaintiff’s claim and pushing those …

Curriculum Development At A New Law School: Dismantling The Walls Of Separation, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Gaming Delaware, William Wilson Bratton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Trumps, Inversions, Balancing, Presumptions, Institution Prompting, And Interpretive Canons: New Ways For Adjudicating Conflicts Between Legal Norms, Carlos E. Gonzalez

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

This article begins by reviewing the axiomatic principles that govern courts when dealing with cases in which two legal norms are interpreted as standing in conflict. The article then makes three distinct contributions.

First, the article explicates the central justification behind the use and perpetuation of the extant principles. In briefest terms, the extant principles are best justified as an attempt to resolve cases in which legal rules stand in conflict in a way that enhances or preserves the democratic legitimacy of law. They do this by favoring norms created by entities of relatively strong democratic legitimacy over norms created …

Mental Disorder And The Civil/Criminal Distinction, Grant H. Morris

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This essay, written as part of a symposium issue to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the University of San Diego Law School, discusses the evaporating distinction between sentence-serving convicts and mentally disordered nonconvicts who are involved in, or who were involved in, the criminal process–people we label as both bad and mad. By examining one Supreme Court case from each of the decades that follow the opening of the University of San Diego School of Law, the essay demonstrates how the promise that nonconvict mentally disordered persons would be treated equally with other civilly committed mental patients was made and …

Judges As Rulemakers, Larry A. Alexander, Emily Sherwin

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This essay analyzes and compares different approaches to the problem of legal precedent. If judges reasoned flawlessly, the ideal approach to precedent would give prior judicial opinions only the weight they naturally carry in moral reasoning. Given that judges are not perfect reasoners, the best approach to precedent is one that treats rules established in prior decisions as authoritative for later judges. In comparison to the natural model of precedent, a rule-based model minimizes error. A rule-based model is also superior to several popular attempts at compromise, which call on judges to reason from the results of prior cases or …

Strategic Judicial Lawmaking: An Empirical Investigation Of Ideology And Publication On The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, David S. Law

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Previous studies have demonstrated that, in a number of contexts, federal appeals court judges divide along ideological lines when deciding cases upon the merits. To date, however, researchers have failed to find evidence that circuit judges take advantage of selective publication rules to further their ideological preferences - for example, by voting more ideologically in published cases that have precedential effect than in unpublished cases that lack binding effect upon future panels. This article evaluates the possibility that judges engage in strategic judicial lawmaking by voting more ideologically in published cases than in unpublished cases. To test this hypothesis, all …

Lawyers As Gatekeepers, Fred C. Zacharias

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Three recent legislative and regulatory initiatives -- the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the 2003 amendments to Model Rules 1.6 and 1.13, and the Gatekeeper Initiative – all seek to enlist the assistance of lawyers in thwarting crime. Outraged opponents have relied on flamboyant rhetoric. They challenge the notion that lawyers should act as gatekeepers – which some of the opponents deem equivalent to operating like the “secret police in Eastern European countries.” This article makes a simple, and ultimately uncontroversial, point. Lawyers are gatekeepers, and always have been. Whatever one’s position on the merits of the specific reforms currently being proposed, it …