Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (6)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- State and Local Government Law (3)
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- Election Law (2)
-
- Jurisprudence (2)
- American Politics (1)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Family Law (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Juvenile Law (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Legal Writing and Research (1)
- Models and Methods (1)
- Political Science (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Science and Technology Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Transportation Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
22nd Time’S The Charm: The 2015 Revisions To Summary Judgment In Louisiana, Garrett Filetti
22nd Time’S The Charm: The 2015 Revisions To Summary Judgment In Louisiana, Garrett Filetti
Louisiana Law Review
The article focuses on the overview of summary judgment, the process for making the motion, and the history of the procedure in both federal and Louisiana state courts and practitioners to make motions for summary judgment an integral part of trial preparation.
An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk
An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk
Articles
Takings scholarship has long focused on the niceties of Supreme Court doctrine, while ignoring the operation of takings law "on the ground" in the state and lower federal courts, which together decide the vast bulk of all takings cases. This study, based primarily on an empirical analysis of more than 2000 reported decisions ovcr the period 1979 through 2012, attempts to fill that void. This study establishes that the Supreme Court's categorical rules govern almost no state takings cases, and that takings claims based on government regulation almost invariably fail. By contrast, when takings claims arise out of government action …
Revising Our “Common Intellectual Heritage”: Federal And State Courts In Our Federal System, Judith Resnik
Revising Our “Common Intellectual Heritage”: Federal And State Courts In Our Federal System, Judith Resnik
Notre Dame Law Review
This Essay pays tribute to Daniel Meltzer’s insight that, to the extent “lawyers have a common intellectual heritage, the federal courts are its primary source.” I do so by analyzing how that heritage is made and remade, as political forces press Congress to deploy federal courts to protect a wide array of interests and state courts absorb the bulk of litigation. The heritage that Meltzer celebrated and to which he contributed was the outcome of twentieth-century social movements that focused on the federal courts as hospitable venues, serving as vivid sources of rights and remedies. A competing heritage has since …
When Children Object: Amplifying An Older Child’S Objection To Termination Of Parental Rights, Brent Pattison
When Children Object: Amplifying An Older Child’S Objection To Termination Of Parental Rights, Brent Pattison
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Each year, thousands of children become wards of the state when a court terminates the legal rights of their parents. Between 2010 and 2014, more than 307,000 children lost their legal relationships to their parents in Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) proceedings. A growing percentage of child welfare cases involve older children. At the same time, too many young people lose their legal relationships with their parents without a family waiting to adopt them. The stakes are high for children in TPR cases; nonetheless, many children—even older children—cannot meaningfully participate in proceedings. Moreover, TPR cases threaten parents’ and children’s rights …
Immigration Enforcement And State Post-Conviction Adjudications: Towards Nuanced Preemption And True Dialogical Federalism, Daniel Kanstroom
Immigration Enforcement And State Post-Conviction Adjudications: Towards Nuanced Preemption And True Dialogical Federalism, Daniel Kanstroom
University of Miami Law Review
The relationship between federal immigration enforcement and state criminal, post-conviction law exemplifies certain inevitable complexities of preemption and federalism. Because neither perfect uniformity nor complete preemption is possible, we must consider two questions: First, whether (and, if so, how) state courts adjudicating rights should account for legitimate federal immigration law goals, such as uniformity and finality? Second, how should federal courts deploy preemption and federalism principles when faced with challenges by federal authorities to such state court actions? This article offers a framework of “dialogical federalism,” seeking to normalize certain tensions under a rubric of dialogue, rather than formal hierarchy …
The Long Shadow Of Bush V. Gore: Judicial Partisanship In Election Cases, Michael S. Kang, Joanna M. Shepherd
The Long Shadow Of Bush V. Gore: Judicial Partisanship In Election Cases, Michael S. Kang, Joanna M. Shepherd
Faculty Articles
Bush v. Gore decided a presidential election and is the most dramatic election case in our lifetime, but cases like it are decided every year at the state level. Ordinary state courts regularly decide questions of election rules and administration that effectively determine electoral outcomes hanging immediately in the balance. Election cases like Bush v. Gore embody a fundamental worry with judicial intervention into the political process: outcome-driven, partisan judicial decisionmaking. The Article investigates whether judges decide cases, particularly politically sensitive ones, based on their partisan loyalties more than the legal merits of the cases. It presents a novel method …
Tesla, Dealer Franchise Laws, And The Politics Of Crony Capitalism, Daniel A. Crane
Tesla, Dealer Franchise Laws, And The Politics Of Crony Capitalism, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
Public choice theory has long proclaimed that business interests can capture regulatory processes to generate economic rents at the expense of consumers. Such political exploitation may go unnoticed and unchallenged for long time periods because, though the rents are captured by a relatively small number of individuals or firms, the costs are widely diffused over a large number of consumers. The triggering event to expose and mobilize opposition to the regulatory capture may not arise until a new technology seeks to challenge the incumbent technology, thus creating a motivated champion to expose and oppose the regulatory capture and advocate for …
Out Of Cite, Out Of Mind: Navigating The Labyrinth That Is State Appellate Courts' Unpublished Opinion Practices, Lauren S. Wood
Out Of Cite, Out Of Mind: Navigating The Labyrinth That Is State Appellate Courts' Unpublished Opinion Practices, Lauren S. Wood
University of Baltimore Law Review
Imagine that you are an attorney, litigating an appellate case with an atypical fact pattern. You are familiar with the law; however, its application to your client's circumstances is entirely unclear. After endless hours of research, you finally find it: a factually apposite case with a favorable outcome. Elated, you grab your legal pad to scribble down the case citation. But then you see it-that dreaded text at the top of the opinion: "NOT SELECTED FOR PUBLICATION." This is an unpublished opinion. Perturbed and exhausted, your mind starts racing: "What's that rule again? Can I use this? I think that …
Commonality And The Constitution: A Framework For Federal And State Court Class Actions, Joseph A. Seiner
Commonality And The Constitution: A Framework For Federal And State Court Class Actions, Joseph A. Seiner
Indiana Law Journal
In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), the Supreme Court concluded that the allegations of pay discrimination in a case brought by over one million female employees lacked sufficient commonality to warrant class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a). Though the case was expressly decided under the Federal Rules, some well-known employer groups have begun to advance the argument that Wal-Mart was decided on constitutional grounds. These advocates maintain that the Supreme Court’s decision creates a commonality standard for all class-action plaintiffs—regardless of whether those litigants bring their claims in federal or state court. …
State Judges And The Right To Vote, Joshua A. Douglas
State Judges And The Right To Vote, Joshua A. Douglas
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
State courts are paramount in defining the constitutional right to vote. This primacy of state courts exists in part because the right to vote is a state-based right protected under state constitutions. In addition, election administration is largely state-driven, with states regulating most of the rules for casting and counting ballots. State law thus guarantees—and state courts interpret—the voting rights that we cherish so much as a society. State courts that issue rulings broadly defining the constitutional right to vote best protect the most fundamental right in our democracy; state decisions that constrain voting to a narrower scope do harm …