Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2019

Judges

Institution
Keyword
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 31 - 60 of 311

Full-Text Articles in Law

Women In Robes October 16, 2019, Roger Williams University School Of Law Oct 2019

Women In Robes October 16, 2019, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.


Using Court-Connected Adr To Increase Court Efficiency, Address Party Needs, And Deliver Justice In Massachusetts, Madhawa Palihapitiya, Susan Jeghelian, Kaila Eisenkraft Oct 2019

Using Court-Connected Adr To Increase Court Efficiency, Address Party Needs, And Deliver Justice In Massachusetts, Madhawa Palihapitiya, Susan Jeghelian, Kaila Eisenkraft

Massachusetts Office of Public Collaboration Publications

This report presents research and findings from a study of court-connected ADR commissioned by the Executive Office of the Trial Court (EOTC). The study was conducted by the state office of dispute resolution also known as the Massachusetts Office of Public Collaboration at the University of Massachusetts Boston. The office has been serving as a neutral forum and state-level resource for almost 30 years. Its mission is to establish programs and build capacity within public entities for enhanced conflict resolution and intergovernmental and cross-sector collaboration in order to save costs for the state and its citizens and enable effective problem-solving …


Judicial Impartiality In A Partisan Era, Cassandra Burke Robertson Oct 2019

Judicial Impartiality In A Partisan Era, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Florida Law Review

Judicial legitimacy rests on the perception of judicial impartiality. As a partisan gulf widens among the American public, however, there is a growing skepticism of the judiciary’s neutrality on politically sensitive topics. Hardening partisan identities mean that there is less middle ground on political issues and less cooperation among those with differing political views. As a result, the public increasingly scrutinizes judges and judicial candidates for signs of political agreement, distrusting those perceived to support the opposing political party.

Judges themselves are not immune to these political forces. In spite of a strong judicial identity that demands impartiality and judicial …


The Campaign To Impeach Justice William O. Douglas; Nixon, Vietnam, And The Conservative Attack On Judicial Independence, Joshua E. Kastenberg Oct 2019

The Campaign To Impeach Justice William O. Douglas; Nixon, Vietnam, And The Conservative Attack On Judicial Independence, Joshua E. Kastenberg

Faculty Book Display Case

The politics of division and distraction, conservatives’ claims of liberalism’s dangers, the wisdom of amoral foreign policy, a partisan challenge to a Supreme Court justice, and threats to the constitutionally mandated balance between the three branches of government: however of the moment these matters might seem, they are clearly presaged in events chronicled by Joshua E. Kastenberg in this book, the first in-depth account of a campaign to impeach Supreme Court justice William O. Douglas nearly fifty years ago.

On April 15, 1970, at President Richard Nixon’s behest, Republican House Minority Leader Gerald Ford brazenly called for the impeachment of …


Justice Breyer And The Rise Of Globalization: An Analysis Of The Jurisprudence Of Justice Breyer As A Pragmatic Visionary, Timothy Sajal Klee Oct 2019

Justice Breyer And The Rise Of Globalization: An Analysis Of The Jurisprudence Of Justice Breyer As A Pragmatic Visionary, Timothy Sajal Klee

Upper Level Writing Requirement Research Papers

No abstract provided.


The Legitimacy Of Judicial Climate Engagement, Katrina Fischer Kuh Oct 2019

The Legitimacy Of Judicial Climate Engagement, Katrina Fischer Kuh

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Courts in key climate change cases have abdicated their constitutional responsibility to protect a prejudiced and disenfranchised group (nonvoting minors and future generations) and remedy an insidious pathology in public discourse and the political process: the industry-funded climate disinformation campaign. This Article posits that this abdication results from courts' uneasiness about displacing the prerogatives of democratically elected bodies. This uneasiness is misplaced. Court engagement with climate cases would strengthen democracy in accord with widely accepted justifications for countermajoritarian judicial review. This Article first describes in detail how courts exhibit a frustrating reticence to accept jurisdiction over cases that present questions …


Internet (Re)Search By Judges, Jurors, And Lawyers, H. Albert Liou, Jasper L. Tran Oct 2019

Internet (Re)Search By Judges, Jurors, And Lawyers, H. Albert Liou, Jasper L. Tran

IP Theory

How can Internet research be used properly and reliably in law? This paper analyzes several key and very different issues affecting judges, jurors, and lawyers. With respect to judges, this paper discusses the rules of judicial conduct and how they guide the appropriate use of the Internet for research; the standards for judicial notice; and whether judges can consider a third category of non-adversarially presented, non-judicially noticed factual evidence. With respect to jurors, this paper discusses causes of and deterrents to jurors conducting Internet research during trials; and the recourse available to parties who are adversely impacted by such behavior. …


Marshall As A Judge, Robert Post Oct 2019

Marshall As A Judge, Robert Post

Fordham Law Review

Marshall is a towering and inspirational figure in the history of American constitutional law. He changed American life forever and unquestionably for the better. But the contemporary significance of Marshall’s legacy is also, in ways that challenge present practices and beliefs, ambiguous.


Statutory Realism: The Jurisprudential Ambivalence Of Interpretive Theory, Abigail R. Moncrieff Oct 2019

Statutory Realism: The Jurisprudential Ambivalence Of Interpretive Theory, Abigail R. Moncrieff

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In the renaissance of statutory interpretation theory, a division has emerged between "new purposivists," who argue that statutes should be interpreted dynamically, and "new textualists," who argue that statutes should be interpreted according to their ordinary semantic meanings. Both camps, however, rest their theories on jurisprudentially ambivalent commitments. Purposivists are jurisprudential realists when they make arguments about statutory meaning, but they are jurisprudential formalists in their views of the judicial power to engage in dynamic interpretation. Textualists are the inverse; they are formalistic in their understandings of statutory meaning but realistic in their arguments about judicial power. The relative triumph …


Article Iii Courts V. Military Commissions: A Comparison Of Protection Of Classified Information And Admissibility Of Evidence In Terrorism Prosecutions, Mohamed Al-Hendy Oct 2019

Article Iii Courts V. Military Commissions: A Comparison Of Protection Of Classified Information And Admissibility Of Evidence In Terrorism Prosecutions, Mohamed Al-Hendy

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming


Supreme Silence And Precedential Pragmatism: King V. Burwell And Statutory Interpretation In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Michael J. Cedrone Oct 2019

Supreme Silence And Precedential Pragmatism: King V. Burwell And Statutory Interpretation In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Michael J. Cedrone

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Article studies statutory interpretation as it is practiced in the federal courts of appeal. Much of the academic commentary in this field focuses on the Supreme Court, which skews the debate and unduly polarizes the field. This Article investigates more broadly by looking at the seventy-two federal appellate cases that cite King v. Burwell in the two years after the Court issued its decision. In deciding that the words “established by the State” encompass a federal program, the Court in King reached a pragmatic and practical result based on statutory scheme and purpose at a fairly high level of …


The Remarkable First 50 Women Law Graduates Of St. Mary’S University: Part One, Regina Stone-Harris Oct 2019

The Remarkable First 50 Women Law Graduates Of St. Mary’S University: Part One, Regina Stone-Harris

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming


Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review Sep 2019

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Vanishing Common Law Judge, Neal Devins, David Klein Sep 2019

The Vanishing Common Law Judge, Neal Devins, David Klein

Neal E. Devins

The common law style of judging appears to be on its way out. Trial courts rarely shape legal policymaking by asserting decisional autonomy through distinguishing, limiting, or criticizing higher court precedent. In an earlier study, we demonstrated the reluctance of lower court judges to assert decisional autonomy by invoking the holding–dicta dichotomy. In this Article, we make use of original empirical research to study the level of deference U.S. district court judges exhibit toward higher courts and whether the level of deference has changed over time. Our analysis of citation behavior over an eighty-year period reveals a dramatic shift in …


The Majoritarian Rehnquist Court?, Neal Devins Sep 2019

The Majoritarian Rehnquist Court?, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


The D'Oh! Of Popular Constiutitonalism, Neal Devins Sep 2019

The D'Oh! Of Popular Constiutitonalism, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


Smoke, Not Fire, Neal Devins Sep 2019

Smoke, Not Fire, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


Ideological Imbalance: Why Democrats Usually Pick Moderate-Liberal Justices And Republicans Usually Pick Conservative Ones, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins Sep 2019

Ideological Imbalance: Why Democrats Usually Pick Moderate-Liberal Justices And Republicans Usually Pick Conservative Ones, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


Ideological Cohesion And Precedent (Or Why The Court Only Cares About Precedent When Most Justices Agree With Each Other), Neal Devins Sep 2019

Ideological Cohesion And Precedent (Or Why The Court Only Cares About Precedent When Most Justices Agree With Each Other), Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

This Article examines the profound role that ideological cohesion plays in explaining the Supreme Court's willingness to advance a coherent vision of the law - either by overruling precedents inconsistent with that vision or by establishing rule-like precedents intended to bind the Supreme Court and lower courts in subsequent cases. Through case studies of the New Deal, Warren, and Rehnquist Courts, this Article calls attention to key differences between Courts in which five or more Justices pursue the same substantive objectives and Courts which lack a dominant voting block. In particular, when five or more Justices pursue the same substantive …


Federalist Court: How The Federalist Society Became The De Facto Selector Of Republican Supreme Court Justices, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins Sep 2019

Federalist Court: How The Federalist Society Became The De Facto Selector Of Republican Supreme Court Justices, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


The Supreme Court's Legitimacy Dilemma, Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Supreme Court's Legitimacy Dilemma, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

No abstract provided.


The Origins (And Fragility) Of Judicial Independence, Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Origins (And Fragility) Of Judicial Independence, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

The federal judiciary today takes certain things for granted. Political actors will not attempt to remove Article III judges outside the impeachment process; they will not obstruct federal court orders; and they will not tinker with the Supreme Court’s size in order to pack it with like-minded Justices. And yet a closer look reveals that these “self-evident truths” of judicial independence are neither self-evident nor necessary implications of our constitutional text, structure, and history. This Article demonstrates that many government officials once viewed these court-curbing measures as not only constitutionally permissible but also desirable (and politically viable) methods of “checking” …


The Power Of "So-Called Judges", Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Power Of "So-Called Judges", Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

No abstract provided.


Constitutional Law Leading Cases: Judicial Elections, Nathan B. Oman Sep 2019

Constitutional Law Leading Cases: Judicial Elections, Nathan B. Oman

Nathan B. Oman

No abstract provided.


Competition And Market Failure In The Antitrust Jurisprudence Of Justice Stevens, Alan J. Meese Sep 2019

Competition And Market Failure In The Antitrust Jurisprudence Of Justice Stevens, Alan J. Meese

Alan J. Meese

No abstract provided.


The Allen Instruction In Criminal Cases: Is The Dynamite Charge About To Be Permanently Defused?, Paul Marcus Sep 2019

The Allen Instruction In Criminal Cases: Is The Dynamite Charge About To Be Permanently Defused?, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.


Judging In The Age Of Technology, Fredric I. Lederer Sep 2019

Judging In The Age Of Technology, Fredric I. Lederer

Fredric I. Lederer

No abstract provided.


Does The 'Mcconnell Principle' Make Sense?, Jeffrey Bellin Sep 2019

Does The 'Mcconnell Principle' Make Sense?, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.


How Merrick Garland Could Help Heal America, Jeffrey Bellin Sep 2019

How Merrick Garland Could Help Heal America, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.


Why The Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not The American People, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins Sep 2019

Why The Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not The American People, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

Supreme Court Justices care more about the views of academics, journalists, and other elites than they do about public opinion. This is true of nearly all Justices and is especially true of swing Justices, who often cast the critical votes in the Court’s most visible decisions. In this Article, we will explain why we think this is so and, in so doing, challenge both the dominant political science models of judicial behavior and the significant work of Barry Friedman, Jeffrey Rosen, and others who link Supreme Court decision making to public opinion.