Law Commons^™

The Love In Loving: Overcoming Artificial Racial Barriers, Justice Leah Ward Sears (Ret.), Sasha N. Greenberg

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The rewritten opinion of Loving v. Virginia in Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court is in stark contrast to the original. Professor Teri McMurtry-Chubb’s judgment for the court “unmasks—and renders unavoidable— the link between America’s history of White supremacy and patriarchy and America’s legal structures for regulating marriage and families.” The feminist opinion relies almost entirely on legal, social, and cultural history, in particular the history of marriage and family relationships among and between Blacks and Whites during the colonial, antebellum, and postbellum eras in the American South.

For the authors of this response Essay, both …

How Is Sex Harassment Discriminatory?, Noa Ben-Asher

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Feminist Judgments takes us to a key moment in the history of sexual harassment law. In Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, the Supreme Court recognized for the first time that both quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It also held that to be actionable under Title VII, sexual advances must be (1) “unwelcome” and (2) “sufficiently severe or pervasive ‘to alter the conditions of [the victim’s] employment and create an abusive working environment.’” The latter part of the test (“sufficiently severe or pervasive”) fits well into the …

Rewriting Judicial Opinions And The Feminist Scholarly Project, Linda L. Berger, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Bridget J. Crawford

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

In 1995, the authors of a law review article examining “feminist judging” focused on the existing social science data concerning women judges and compared the voting records and opinions of the only female Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O’Connor. Based on this review, the authors concluded that appointing more women as judges would make little difference to judicial outcomes or processes. The authors accused those who advocated for more women on the bench of having a hidden feminist agenda and bluntly concluded that “[b]y any measure, feminist judges fit very uneasily in most …

Feminist Judgments & #Metoo, Margaret E. Johnson

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The Feminist Judgments book series and the #MeToo movement share the feminist method of narrative. Feminist Judgments is a scholarly project of rewriting judicial opinions using feminist legal theory. #MeToo is a narrative movement by people, primarily women, telling their stories of sexual harassment or assault. Both Feminist Judgments and #MeToo bring to the surface stories that have been silenced, untold, or overlooked. These narrative collections can and do effectuate genderjustice change by empowering people, changing perspectives, opening up new learning, and affecting future legal and nonlegal outcomes.

Feminist Judgments And Women's Rights At Work, Gillian Thomas

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The history of the law’s treatment of working women is largely a history of the law’s treatment of women’s bodies. Overwhelmingly created by male judges, that jurisprudence considers women from a remove—their physicality, their reproductive capacity, their stature, their sexuality—eclipsing meaningful consideration of their lived experience, on or off the job. As vividly illustrated by so many of the alternative rulings contained in Feminist Judgments, that erasure resulted in Supreme Court decisions that—even when they came out the “right” way, that is, in favor of the female litigant—squandered opportunities for advancing sex equality.

The tantalizing notion of “what might …

Revisiting Roe To Advance Reproductive Justice For Childbearing Women, Elizabeth Kukura

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The rewritten opinions that comprise Feminist Judgments together provide a powerful critique of judicial decisionmaking that renders certain women’s experiences invisible. By reimagining key Supreme Court decisions, the opinion writers unmask various ways that gendered conceptions of social roles are deeply entrenched in the rulings and reasoning of the highest court of the United States. The authors also show, through their alternative texts, that opinions which are celebrated as women’s rights victories can nevertheless impede progress toward equality and liberty.

Kimberly Mutcherson’s rewritten concurrence in Roe v. Wade illustrates the missed opportunities and unintended consequences that have made the landmark …

Looking To The Litigant: Reaction Essay To Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions Of The United States Supreme Court, Claire B. Wofford

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Feminist Judgments’s focus on jurists alone is not unusual. My own discipline has devoted a great deal of study to understanding why and how the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court make the decisions they do. Some of the scholarship has even examined whether women judges might operate differently than their male counterparts, though the findings have been mixed at best. The emphasis, moreover, is understandable and laudable, as it is jurists who have the final say on the content of law.

Emphasizing judicial behavior, however, unfortunately overlooks the fundamental passivity of the courts. As much as they might …

Extending The Critical Rereading Project, Gabrielle Appleby, Rosalind Dixon

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

In this reflection, we want to explain a project in Australia that extends the feminist judgments project and adapts it specifically for the purpose of teaching critical theory, critical legal thinking, and the assumptions inherent in the legal method.

Feminist Judgments And The Future Of Reproductive Justice, Sarah Weddington

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Roe v. Wade is one of the twenty-five Supreme Court cases that has been rewritten from a feminist perspective by an imaginative group of law professors and lawyers. This Essay is based on remarks made by Ms. Weddington at a panel discussion held at Temple University Beasley School of Law on November 13, 2017.

Feminist Judgments And The Rewritten Price Waterhouse, Sandra Sperino

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

In Feminist Judgments, Professor Martha Chamallas reimagines the canonical case of Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. In that case, the Supreme Court recognized that a plaintiff can prevail on a Title VII claim by showing that a protected trait was a motivating factor in a negative employment outcome. In that case, the Court noted that plaintiffs in discrimination cases should not be required to prove but-for cause to prevail.

The introduction to the Professor Chamallas concurrence correctly notes many of the rewritten opinion’s strengths. Professor Chamallas provides richer detail about the facts underlying the case and the context in …

Headscarf Bans, Equal Treatment, And Minority Integration In The Workplace, Elizabeth A. Clark

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Andrea Pin’s Essay on the Achbita and Bougnaoui cases effectively highlights the significance of the cases and the singularity of the rulings, as well as the tension they create with other European Union norms and policies. The European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) rulings in these cases are also in tension with the court’s own discrimination law and exacerbate the pressing European question, particularly significant in light of the recent migration crisis, of how best to incorporate ethnic and religious minorities into a society.

How Would The European Court Of Human Rights Decide Holt V. Hobbs?, Francesca M. Genova

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Essay inquires: How would the ECtHR decide Holt v. Hobbs, given the same evidence provided at the district court level and the reasoning of the court of appeals? Analyzing this case through the ECtHR’s lens will elucidate the implications of the proportionality test in American jurisprudence. To do so, Part I will compare the two jurisdictions. Part II will summarize Holt v. Hobbs. Part III will describe the ECtHR’s relevant recent free exercise jurisprudence. Part IV will discuss how, based on this analysis, the ECtHR could decide Holt v. Hobbs in light of its overarching principles. Finally, …

Employment Division V. Smith And State Free Exercise Protections: Should State Courts Feel Obligated To Apply The Federal Standard In Adjudicating Alleged Violations Of Their State Free Exercise Clauses?, Matthew Linnabary

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

State courts should feel free to apply whatever test is most appropriate based on the textual provisions of their state constitution that protects the free exercise or worship of its citizens. Of course, such freedom to the state courts is greatly limited in many states by the passage of their own Religious Freedom Restoration Acts. These acts generally set forth precisely how the courts must determine whether or not a law violates the free exercise or worship of a claimant. Even if not limited by a RFRA—which would generally require strict scrutiny—a state court should apply strict scrutiny to violations …

The Limits Of Natural Law Originalism, Mikolaj Barczentewicz

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

In Enduring Originalism, Jeffrey Pojanowski and Kevin C. Walsh outline how originalism in constitutional interpretation can be grounded in modern natural law theory as developed by John Finnis. Their argument to that effect is powerful and constitutes a welcome addition both to natural law theory and to originalist theory. However, the authors chose to present their account as a superior alternative to, or modification of, the “positive” (“original law”) originalism of Stephen Sachs and William Baude. It is that aspect of the paper that I focus on in this short Essay. Contrary to their strong claims in that direction, …

Helpless Giants? The National Park Service’S Ability To Influence And Manage External Threats To Redwood National And State Parks, Jack Mcleod

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Essay analyzes the interactions between federal, state, and private landowners regarding Redwood National and State Parks (RNSP) to determine what power the National Park Service (NPS) has to stop the destruction of its trees resulting from externalities. Part I briefly discusses the historical development of RNSP, focusing on how its boundaries impact inner scenic resources. Part II argues that California state efforts have traditionally hampered redwood protection in RNSP, and Part III examines the limited resources the NPS possesses to protect redwoods. Ultimately, the NPS has few effective tools at its disposal to protect redwoods against external threats, except …

Clarifying The “Probate Lending” Debate: A Response To Professors Horton And Chandrasekher, Jeremy Kidd Ph.D.

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The debate over third-party funding of legal claims just got more interesting. The debate already had plot twists, such as free-market scholars lining up in opposition to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and alongside proplaintiff scholars who they oppose in tort reform debates. Now add to the mix a recent paper by Professors Horton and Chandrasekher that introduced an entirely new angle to the debate: funding of probate disputes. Now that this parallel area of funding has been identified, comparing and contrasting probate funding with litigation funding should illuminate the incentives that funders/recipients face in both scenarios. By pointing out …

The Law Of Deception, Amit Pundik

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The purpose of this Essay is both descriptive and normative. On the descriptive level, this Essay details the Israeli jurisprudence and scholarly opinions on the issue of rape by deception in a way accessible to non-Hebrew readers, and briefly compares it with approaches taken elsewhere. On the normative level, the Essay seeks to show that the various attempts to answer the question of which characteristics can constitute deception all fail. In particular, it seeks to show that the Israeli approach is the least attractive, a conclusion that, it is hoped, may serve as a warning to reformers in other jurisdictions …

Islam And Religious Freedom: The Experience Of Religious Majorities And Minorities, Brett G. Scharffs

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

It seems likely that change in Islam will be affected both by outside and internal sources, as was the case for the Catholic Church and its journey to Dignitatis Humanae. However, one thing the Catholic experience suggests is that meaningful and profound change does not simply come from outside pressures; it comes from authentic and sincere evaluation and interpretation by insiders of a religious tradition of that tradition itself. Thus, if Islam is going to come to embrace religious freedom as an important value, this will be the result, significantly if not primarily, of Muslims interpreting their own sacred …

A Statistical Analysis Of Privacy Policy Design, Ari E. Waldman

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Essay takes a further step in a developing research agenda on the design of privacy policies. As described in more detail in Part II, I created an online survey in which respondents were asked to choose one of two websites that would better protect their privacy given images of segments of their privacy policies. Some of the questions paired notices with, on the one hand, privacy protective practices displayed in difficult-to-read designs, and, on the other hand, invasive data use practices displayed in graphical, aesthetically pleasing ways. Many survey respondents seemed to make their privacy decisions based on design …

There Is A Place For Muslims In America: On Different Understandings Of Neutrality, Mark A. Goldfelder

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

American neutrality is not about the government making sure religion is not visible or even treated benevolently. The American concept of neutrality just means that the government should not treat religion as special, for better or for worse, simply because it is religion. For example, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that laws touching religion must have a valid secular purpose, and not serve primarily to advance or inhibit religion. But that does not mean that religion should not be respected. The key to the American conception of religious neutrality lies in the understanding that religion is valuable—despite what strict …

Artis V. District Of Columbia—What Did The Court Actually Say?, Doron M. Kalir

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Comment does not follow the many constitutional and jurisprudential intricacies of the fascinating battle of Artis v. District of Columbia. Instead, it intends to point to what seems to be a glaring misunderstanding of the majority opinion by the dissent. This Comment also raises the possibility that the majority itself did not understand the full implications of its own opinion, as evidenced by its response to the dissent. If this is indeed the state of affairs, an inevitable question arises: What did the Court actually say in Artis v. District of Columbia?

Nondiscrimination In 5g Standards, Eli Greenbaum

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The broad diffusion of 5G technology, and its incorporation into a hefty catalog of devices and machines, will put more pressure on the nondiscrimination prong of the FRAND commitment. The value of 5G technology to simple consumer electronics (such as home routers) will differ starkly from the value of the same technology to cutting edge equipment (such as for remote surgery). Does a nondiscrimination commitment allow patentees to charge differential royalties for 5G technology in such diverse use cases? Both TCL and Unwired Planet examined the requirements of nondiscrimination only as between companies providing similar products. Going forward, however, judicial …

Comcast-Nbcu, Netflix, And The Fcc: The Dual Merger Review Process As A House Of Cards, Matthew J. Razzano

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Essay argues that the FCC inconsistently dissects market trends, and its costly processes—paired with DOJ review—stymie growth in the telecommunications industry. Part I traces the history of dual review and compares the FCC’s procedures with the DOJ’s. Part II evaluates the Comcast-NBCU deal— its history, the FCC Order, and the conditions imposed. Part III argues that the FCC is not adept at analyzing telecommunications transactions, and is certainly not adept at predicting market developments. It then claims that the Comcast-NBCU deal unearthed serious problems in the dual review process. Specifically, jurisdictional restrictions facing the FCC limit the types of …