Law Commons^™

Statement On 'Bringing Justice Closer To The People: Examining Ideas For Restructuring The Ninth Circuit', Arthur D. Hellman

Testimony

Congress is once again considering legislation to divide the largest of the federal judicial circuits, the Ninth. On March 16, 2017, a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on “Bringing Justice Closer to the People: Examining Ideas for Restructuring the Ninth Circuit.” This statement was submitted for the record of the hearing.

The statement addresses three questions. First, what considerations should Congress take into account in determining whether to restructure the Ninth Circuit? Second, if restructuring is desirable, how should the legislation be drafted? Third, how do pending House bills measure up?

The burden is on those …

Blackstone, Expositor And Censor Of Law Both Made And Found, Jessie Allen

Book Chapters

Jeremy Bentham famously insisted on the separation of law as it is and law as it should be, and criticized his contemporary William Blackstone for mixing up the two. According to Bentham, Blackstone costumes judicial invention as discovery, obscuring the way judges make new law while pretending to uncover preexisting legal meaning. Bentham’s critique of judicial phoniness persists to this day in claims that judges are “politicians in robes” who pick the outcome they desire and rationalize it with doctrinal sophistry. Such skeptical attacks are usually met with attempts to defend doctrinal interpretation as a partial or occasional limit on …

The Persuasive Authority Of Internationalized Criminal Tribunals, Elena Baylis

Articles

After a period in which it seemed as though hybrid criminal tribunals were waning, proposals for such tribunals are proliferating again. The recent success of the Extraordinary African Chambers in trying Hisséne Habré highlights the resurgent trend toward ad hoc internationalized courts and chambers to try cases of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The international community could make strategic choices in designing this new generation of tribunals to maximize their effectiveness. One way that international courts spread their influence is through their persuasive authority. Even if their decisions are not binding on the concerned national courts, by persuading …

Landowners' Fcc Dilemma: Rereading The Supreme Court's Armstrong Opinion After The Third Circuit's Depolo Ruling, Gerald S. Dickinson

Articles

In Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Ctr., Inc., the Supreme Court took a turn in its refusal to provide avenues for relief to private actors against the state in federal court, finding that the Supremacy Clause does not provide for an implied right of action to sue to enjoin unconstitutional actions by state officers. Many critics of that decision, including the four dissenting Justices, question the wisdom of the ruling generally. However, from a property rights perspective, the decision sheds light on a dilemma unforeseen by many scholars and made most apparent by a recent Third Circuit decision, Jeffrey DePolo …

Comparing The Effects Of Judges' Gender And Arbitrators' Gender In Sex Discrimination Cases And Why It Matters, Pat K. Chew

Articles

Empirical research substantiates that the judges’ gender makes a difference in sex discrimination and sexual harassment court cases. The author’s study of arbitration of sex discrimination cases administered by the American Arbitration Association between 2010 and 2014, however, finds that this judges’ “gender effect” does not occur. Namely, there is no significant difference in the decision-making patterns of female and male arbitrators as indicated by case outcomes.

The author proposes that characteristics of arbitrators, the arbitration process, and arbitration cases all combine to help explain the gender effect differences. Further, she suggests that this analysis reveals concerns about the arbitration …

U.S. Discovery In A Transnational And Digital Age And The Increasing Need For Comparative Analysis, Vivian Grosswald Curran

Articles

U.S. Courts generally prefer applying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure over The Hague Evidence Convention for the taking of documentary evidence located abroad. With respect to the French blocking statute with which the Supreme Court was dealing in the seminal case of Aérospatiale, and under the powerful influence of stare decisis, a line of cases developed dismissing the French blocking statute for having been intended by its legislature principally to thwart the sovereignty of the U.S. trial court, and never having been intended to be enforced. Criteria for the general assessment of blocking statutes have emerged from the courts’ …