Law Commons^™

International Rule Of Law And Constitutional Justice In International Investment Law And Arbitration, Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Judicial administration of justice through reasoned interpretation, application and clarification of legal principles and rules is among the oldest paradigms of constitutional justice. The principles of procedural justice underlying investor-state arbitration remain controversial, especially if confidentiality and party autonomy governing commercial arbitration risk neglecting adversely affected third parties and public interests. There are also concerns that rule-following and formal equality of foreign investors and home states may not ensure substantive justice in the settlement of investment disputes unless arbitrators and courts take more seriously their customary law obligation of settling disputes in conformity with human rights obligations of governments and …

How Great Judges Think: Judges Richard Posner, Henry Friendly, And Roger Traynor On Judicial Lawmaking, Edmund Ursin

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mothers And Sons: The Lloyd Schlup Story, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

This article tells the back story of the near-execution of Lloyd Schlup, condemned to die in Missouri for the 1984 murder of fellow Missouri State Penitentiary prisoner Arthur Dade, Jr. Mr. Schlup came within hours of execution before the Supreme Court granted certiorari on his case to decide whether a prisoner who is probably innocent can avail himself of the habeas corpus remedy. Mr. Schlup's and Mr. Dade's mothers played pivotal roles in the ultimate outcome of Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995). Dedicated to the memory of Nancy Slater.

The Closing Of The Judicial Mind, David F. Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Reviews of R.F. Nagel, Unrestrained: Judicial Excess and the Mind of the American Lawyer, Transaction Publishers (2008) and R. Posner, How Judges Think, Harvard University Press (2008)

Federal And State Judicial Selection In An Interest Group Perspective, Rafael Gely, Michael E. Solimine

Faculty Publications

The literature on judicial selection systems has given considerable attention to the role that politicians and their parties - through their legislative roles - have played in the adoption and operation of these judicial selection systems. Less attention, however, has been given to both the effect that interest groups, broadly defined, have in the creation and implementation of judicial selection systems and the effect that these systems have on the strategies adopted by interest groups to accomplish their goals. This Article seeks to fill this gap. Using the framework advanced by William M. Landes and Richard A. Posner in their …

Forward: Sandra Day O'Connor, Earl F. Nelson, And State Judicial Selection And Retention Systems, R. Lawrence Dessem

Faculty Publications

In difficult cases, in unpopular cases, in cases that may draw criticism from the executive branch of government, the legislature, the media, or the general populace, it is essential that judges be insulated from public pressure. However much we believe in the strength and integrity of the human spirit, we cannot expect judges to do justice without establishing an institutional framework that guarantees them that their next decision, however loathsome or unpopular, will not be their last.

Impeaching A Federal Judge: Some Lessons From History, Arthur D. Hellman

Testimony

In August 2014, Federal District Judge Mark Fuller was arrested on a charge of misdemeanor battery after his wife called 911 from an Atlanta hotel room and told the operator, “He’s beating on me.” Judge Fuller has agreed to enter a pre-trial diversion program; if he completes the program, the criminal case against him will be dismissed. But Judge Fuller may face other consequences. The Acting Chief Judge of the Eleventh Circuit has initiated proceedings under the federal judicial misconduct statute. And some members of Congress and editorial writers have said that if Judge Fuller does not resign from the …

O Que É Uma Universidade?, Paulo Ferreira Da Cunha

Paulo Ferreira da Cunha

Pouca gente sabe hoje o que é uma Universidade, a sério. Confunde-se muito Universidade e super-mercado de aulas, ou fábrica de « investigação » ou « pesquisa », assim como se confunde serviço público com negócio, vocação com interesse pessoal, etc. É a própria essência da Universidade que está em causa. A confusão é grande no público, que vê a Universidade sobretudo como uma forma de promoção social, pelos diplomas. A confusão não é menor na própria Universidade. Os universitários mais responsáveis interrogam-se sobre a sua função, o sentido do trabalho que fizeram e fazem, e a sua sorte na …

Obama's Second Chance To Make History, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

This short article provides a view of the circumstances and issues surrounding President Obama's nomination of federal circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.

With President Barack Obama's nomination of federal circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, his judicial appointment team has been presented with an early introduction to what has become one the most challenging areas of presidential governance over the last several decades.

The nominations to the nation's highest court have generated controversies going back to Ronald Reagan's failed attempt to elevate the highly controversial federal Judge Robert Bork to the court in the …

Unmasking Judicial Extremism, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Chief William's Ghost: The Problematic Persistence Of The Duty To Sit, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Issue 4: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Swinging Pendulum Of Sentencing Reform: Political Actors Regulating District Court Discretion, Lydia Brashear Tiede

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Zero-Sum Judicial Elections: Balancing Free Speech And Impartiality Through Recusal Reform, David K. Stott

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Juristocracy In The Trenches: Problem-Solving Judges And The Therapeutic Jurisprudence In Drug Treatment Courts And Unified Family Courts, Richard C. Boldt, Jana B. Singer

Jana B. Singer

This article explores the role of judges on two types of “problem-solving courts”: drug treatment courts and unified family courts. It compares the behavior these “problem-solving” judges to more traditional models of judicial behavior and to activist judging at the appellate level. The authors conclude that the judges who serve on these problem-solving courts have largely repudiated the classical judicial virtues of restraint, disinterest and modesty in favor of a more activist and therapeutic stance. However, the causes and consequences of this role-shift are complex. In particular, the authors suggest that the proliferation of problem solving courts and judges is …

The "Hidden Judiciary": An Empirical Examination Of Executive Branch Justice, Chris Guthrie, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Andrew J. Wistrich

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Administrative law judges attract little scholarly attention, yet they decide a large fraction of all civil disputes. In this Article, we demonstrate that these executive branch judges, like their counterparts in the judicial branch, tend to make predominantly intuitive rather than predominantly deliberative decisions. This finding sheds new light on executive branch justice by suggesting that judicial intuition, not judicial independence, is the most significant challenge facing these important judicial officers.

Fathers, Foreskins, And Family Law, Dena S. Davis

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In the United States, a custodial parent has the right and responsibility to make medical decisions for one's child. But does that right encompass consenting for a surgical procedure for which there is little or no medical justification? What if the noncustodial parent opposed the procedure? And when is a child old enough to make the decision for him- or herself? How should a physician respond when asked to perform a surgical procedure when the decision is enmeshed in family controversy? These and other questions are considered in Boldt, a recent family law case decided by the Supreme Court of …

Does Anyone Get Stopped At The Gate? An Empirical Assessment Of The Daubert Trilogy In The States, Eric Helland, Jonathan Klick

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s trilogy of evidence cases, Daubert, Joiner, and Kumho Tire appear to mark a significant departure in the way scientific and expert evidence is handled in federal court. By focusing on the underlying methods used to generate the experts’ conclusions, Daubert has the potential to impose a more rigorous standard on experts. Given this potential, some individuals have called for states to adopt the Daubert standards to purge “junk science” from state courts. However, there is relatively little empirical support for the notion that Daubert affects the quality of expert evidence. Using a large dataset of state court …

Does Unconscious Racial Bias Affect Trial Judges?, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Sheri Johnson, Andrew J. Wistrich, Chris Guthrie

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Race matters in the criminal justice system. Black defendants appear to fare worse than similarly situated white defendants. Why? Implicit bias is one possibility. Researchers, using a well-known measure called the implicit association test, have found that most white Americans harbor implicit bias toward Black Americans. Do judges, who are professionally committed to egalitarian norms, hold these same implicit biases? And if so, do these biases account for racially disparate outcomes in the criminal justice system? We explored these two research questions in a multi-part study involving a large sample of trial judges drawn from around the country. Our results …

Recent Private International Law Developments Before The Supreme Court Of Canada, Antonin I. Pribetic

Antonin I. Pribetic

A trilogy of interesting cases involving private international law recently wended their way to the Supreme Court of Canada: (1) King v. Drabinsky (an Ontario case addressing the applicability of the Charter in respect of the enforcement of a foreign judgment); (2) Teck Cominco Metals Ltd. v. Lloyd's Underwriters (a British Columbia case involving declaratory relief in the context of parallel proceedings and forum non conveniens); and (3) Yugraneft v. Rexx Management Corporation (an Alberta case which affirmed that the two-year limitation period under s.3 of Alberta's Limitations Act, governs when a party seeks the recognition and enforcement in Alberta …

Neglected Justices: Discounting For History, G. Edward White

Vanderbilt Law Review

The category of "neglected Justices" presupposes meaningful baselines for evaluating judicial reputations. A Justice cannot be deemed "neglected" except against the backdrop of some purported consensus about that Justice's reputation and the reputations of other Justices. Moreover, when the category of "neglected Justices" encompasses the performance of Justices who served in different time periods, it also presupposes that evaluative baselines for Justices can retain their integrity in the face of historical change and historical contingency.

This Article argues that when one discounts for history in the process of evaluating judicial reputations, the effects of history are sufficiently powerful to throw …

William Johnson, The Dog That Did Not Bark?, Mark R. Killenbeck

Vanderbilt Law Review

The conventional wisdom is that Justice William Johnson, Jr., was the "the first dissenter." This is not literally true. The first published opinion of the Court was Georgia v. Brailsford, in which each member of the Court expressed his views seriatim. Ironically, the first to speak was the first Justice Johnson, Thomas of Maryland, whose reasoning helped create a 4-2 split that produced a number of Supreme Court firsts: the first published set of opinions, the first split decision, and the first dissent.

It was the "other" Justice Johnson, William of South Carolina, who earned the reputation as the first …

Original Sin And Judicial Independence: Providing Accountability For Justices, Paul D. Carrington, Roger C. Cramton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Original Sin And Judicial Independence: Providing Accountability For Justices, Paul D. Carrington, Roger C. Cramton

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Extraordinary Rendition: A Wrong Without A Right, Robert Johnson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of The Conference Of Chief Justices As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Caperton V. A.T. Massey Coal Co., No. 08-22 (U.S. Jan. 5, 2009), Roy A. Schotland

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Recommendation 12, Naiomi Metallic

Reports & Public Policy Documents

This article focuses on the Marshall Commission Report’s specific recommendation for increased representation of racialized persons within the judiciary.

Augustus Noble Hand / Charles Merrill Hough, Roger J. Miner '56

Legal History

No abstract provided.

Regulating Discourtesy On The Bench: A Study In The Evolution Of Judicial Independence, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

In this paper, we argue that the myth of the detached, rational judge, free from emotion runs the risk of undermining the quality of judging, obscuring the transparency of judicial decisions, and deterring the development of diverse judicial styles. We explore the history of the myth of the detached judge and how it made its way into rules of judicial conduct. By contextualizing this image of the judiciary, the article concludes that the rules of judicial conduct have come to embody an antiquated understanding of judicial independence and ought to be revised to reflect a more modern concept of the …

Case Interpretation, Shawn J. Bayern

Scholarly Publications

This Article develops an approach to constructing the meaning of prior court cases that is more helpful than formalistic, conventional distinctions between concepts like "holdings" and "dicta." Instead of trying to classify judicial announcements into fixed categories, courts should engage in a broader interpretive inquiry when confronting prior cases. Determining what a judicial opinion stands for requires determining the intent that motivated the opinion, as carefully understood in light of the factual and argumentative context that gave rise to it.

Under this view of precedent, binding common law arises in large part from principles explicated after considering facts. Viewing precedent …