Law Commons^™

Maintaining Due Process By Extending Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. To Federal Class Actions, Felicia D. Sych

American University Law Review

In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its seminal decision in Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, subsequently altering the scope of personal jurisdiction and further narrowing its interpretation of specific jurisdiction. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. held that a state court can only assert specific personal jurisdiction over a defendant when there is a meaningful nexus between the forum state and the claims at issue. The Court purposefully refrained from deciding whether its holding applies to federal courts adjudicating federal class actions. After denying a petition for writ of certiorari to resolve the issue in 2021, the question …

To Privilege Or Not To Privilege: A Rational Solution To Claiming The Deliberations Privilege Under Military Rules Of Evidence 509 And 606(B), Jared Hall

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Disability Docket, Jasmine E. Harris, Karen M. Tani, Shira Wakschlag

American University Law Review

The monumental changes emanating from the contemporary Supreme Court have now generated abundant commentary—but it remains possible to glean new insights if we review the Court’s work from an alternative perspective, one that does not often inform mainstream accounts. Drawing on insights from Disability Legal Studies and other critical approaches to law, as well as from the trenches of disability advocacy and civil litigation, this Article applies a “disability lens” to the Supreme Court’s 2021 and 2022 Terms. Our review of the Court’s published decisions and broader docket suggests three themes. We highlight (1) the role of disability cases in …

Constitutionalism Today: The Prospects Of The European Constituional Community, Susanne Baer, Kriszta Kovacs, Maya Vogel

Book Chapters

In the late 1940s a consensus emerged: a post-World War II, post-colonial, post-authoritarian, grand consensus in Europe and beyond. Dignity, liberty, and equality should not merely be promises on paper or an elitist privilege for the few, and representative democracy should be the way to run societies. This consensus certainly gave birth to a variety of legal regimes, but it also defined a baseline for the political systems we call constitutional democracies: first, power should be distributed to parliament and representative government via fair elections that ensure equal voting rights and a realistic option of a peaceful change of government …

Sounds Of Silence: A Thematic Analysis Of Victim Impact Statements, Tali Gal, Ruthy Lowenstein Lazar

Lewis & Clark Law Review

The Victim Impact Statement (VIS) is a legal document that crime victims submit to the court as part of the sentencing stage, informing the court about the harms they have suffered. The VIS enhances victims’ sense of procedural justice, voice, and inclusion in the process, as well as their overall wellbeing. At the same time, their use raises concern about defendants’ due process rights. The Article argues that VISs make a novel contribution to the criminal proceeding, beyond their formal goals of providing information to the court about the impact of the crime on its victims. Using a thematic analysis …

Judicial Independence And The Rule Of Law, D. Brooks Smith

Lewis & Clark Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Federal Circuit: A Microcosm Of Changes In The Legal Landscape, Jimmie V. Reyna

American University Law Review

On April 2, 1982, Congress established the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit through the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982, which merged the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals with the appellate division of the United States Court of Claims. The Federal Circuit has just surpassed forty years of appellate jurisprudence.

The Judicial Activism Of Justice Anthony Kennedy, Carlos A. Ball

American University Law Review

Few recent Supreme Court justices have had a greater impact on constitutional law than Anthony Kennedy. Although commentators have explored the substance of Justice Kennedy’s jurisprudence in some detail, legal scholars have not systematically analyzed the extent of his judicial activism. This Article uses the term “judicial activism” descriptively rather than normatively to help account for a judge’s willingness to strike down federal, state, and local laws on constitutional grounds. It finds that, under a descriptive definition, when compared to the justices with whom he served, Justice Kennedy was a singularly judicial activist judge.

This conclusion rests on three findings. …

Binding Hercules: A Proposal For Bench Trials, Maggie Wittlin

Faculty Scholarship

Should the Federal Rules of Evidence apply at bench trials? By their own terms, they apply, but courts have been reluctant to enforce them on themselves with the same rigor that they enforce them on juries. Scholarship on the issue has been mixed. Although McCormick deemed the rules of evidence "absurdly inappropriate" outside of the jury context, more recently, scholars have suggested that many reasons for imposing exclusionary rules on jurors also apply to judges. Yet practical problems persist. For one, once judge evaluate the admissibility of evidence, they can’t “unring the bell” and ignore evidence they've decided to exclude. …

A Manageable Constitution, Michael Gentithes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Federal judges frequently avoid constitutional cases that raise difficult issues of public policy, using doctrines like standing and political questions as shields against judicial overreach. But a new and dangerous sword that allows judges to declare constitutional cases nonjusticiable is emerging in federal courts: a manageability prerequisite. The manageability prerequisite that emerged first in the Supreme Court’s gerrymandering jurisprudence and has since spread virulently throughout the circuit and district courts threatens to close the courthouse doors to a wide swath of litigants. Left unchecked, manageability could both significantly weaken the weakest branch and provide judges unbounded discretion to preserve any …

Race-Ing Antitrust, I. Bennett Capers, Gregory Day

Faculty Scholarship

Antitrust law has a race problem. To spot an antitrust violation, courts inquire into whether an act has degraded consumer welfare. Since anticompetitive practices are often assumed to enhance consumer welfare, antitrust offenses are rarely found. Key to this framework is that antitrust treats all consumers monolithically; that consumers are differently situated, especially along lines of race, simply is ignored.

We argue that antitrust law must disaggregate the term “consumer” to include those who disproportionately suffer from anticompetitive practices via a community welfare standard. As a starting point, we demonstrate that anticompetitive conduct has specifically been used as a tool …

Theorizing Corroboration, Maggie Wittlin

Faculty Scholarship

A child makes an out-of-court statement accusing an adult of abuse. That statement is important proof, but it also presents serious reliability concerns. When deciding whether it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted, should a court consider whether the child’s statement is corroborated—whether, for example, there is medical evidence of abuse? More broadly, should courts consider corroboration when deciding whether evidence is reliable enough to be admitted at trial? Judges, rule-makers, and scholars have taken significantly divergent approaches to this question and come to different conclusions.

This Article argues that there is a key problem with using corroboration to evaluate …

"How Exactly Does It Get Done Here?" Conducting Cross-Jurisdictional Research With Judges And Court Staff, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

The legal, political, and organizational environment in which judges and court staff work affects their performance in significant ways. To ensure that researchers control for these effects, it is critical that they take sufficient time in the research design phase to identify relevant factors that might complicate their analyses or distort the interpretation of research findings. This article highlights common challenges of multijurisdictional research, including inconsistent use of terminology, differing organizational structures and procedures, and exogenous factors such as court governance, policymaking authority, funding, and local court culture. It also offers guidance to researchers on identifying and integrating these factors …

A Synthesis Of The Science And Law Relating To Eyewitness Misidentifications And Recommendations For How Police And Courts Can Reduce Wrongful Convictions Based On Them, Henry F. Fradella

Seattle University Law Review

The empirical literature on perception and memory consistently demonstrates the pitfalls of eyewitness identifications. Exoneration data lend external validity to these studies. With the goal of informing law enforcement officers, prosecutors, criminal defense attorneys, judges, and judicial law clerks about what they can do to reduce wrongful convictions based on misidentifications, this Article presents a synthesis of the scientific knowledge relevant to how perception and memory affect the (un)reliability of eyewitness identifications. The Article situates that body of knowledge within the context of leading case law. The Article then summarizes the most current recommendations for how law enforcement personnel should—and …

Changemakers: Elevating Conversations Around Indigenous Peoples' Rights, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

A Wrong Turn With The Rights Of Nature Movement, Noah M. Sachs

Law Faculty Publications

Environmentalists have long dreamed of granting enforceable legal rights to nature, and their vision has recently become reality. Governments in the United States and abroad are enacting Rights of Nature laws, and many scholars have championed this burgeoning movement as one of the best hopes for preserving the environment.

Legal rights for nature seem visionary, but policymakers and scholars are overlooking considerable problems with this approach. This Article spotlights these problems, including the vague and incoherent content of nature’s rights, the difficulty of defining the boundaries of natural entities, the absence of limiting principles for the rights, and the legislation’s …

Reviewing Mixed Questions Of Fact And Law In Administrative Adjudications: Why Courts Should Move To “Substantially Established Facts”, Gwendolyn Savitz

Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works

Courts are inconsistent in how they review mixed questions of fact and law in administrative adjudications. Many courts simply and unquestioningly review the entire mixed issue using only substantial evidence review. This grants extreme and unquestioning deference to any legal interpretation used by the agency, far more than would be available to it under the increasingly besieged Chevron doctrine, despite the fact that the adjudications being reviewed in this manner generally would not even be entitled to Chevron deference if the legal component of the mixed question were analyzed separately. Courts should therefore analyze the different components of a mixed …

American University Law Review Keynote Address, Erwin Chemerinsky

American University Law Review

My talk this morning focuses on the agenda of the current Roberts Court. I think that every Supreme Court can be said to have an agenda. Sometimes it seems conscious and deliberate, apparent from the outset. Sometimes it seems to evolve and only becomes obvious later.

The Purcell Principle And The Antiblackness Of Constitutional Fundamentalism, Brittany Carter

American University Law Review

In Milligan v. Merrill, a district court in Alabama found that the state legislature designed Alabama’s new congressional district map in a way that diminished Black political power, and ordered the legislature to redraw its map to remedy the violation. Two weeks later, the Supreme Court stayed the district court’s order, allowing Alabama’s congressional elections to proceed under the discriminatory maps. The only stated rationale, offered by Justices Kavanaugh and Alito in a concurring opinion, was the so-called Purcell principle – the notion that federal courts should not enjoin a state’s election laws in the period close to an election. …

The Absurd Reach Of A "Colorblind" Constitution, David Hinojosa, Genevieve Bonadies Torres

American University Law Review

Affirmative action has long spurred debates over whether the Equal Protection Clause and subsequent civil rights legislation were intended to permit policies aimed at disrupting racial hierarchies, dismantling systemic discrimination, and ensuring equal opportunity for Black people and other historically marginalized groups. The current lawsuits pending before the Supreme Court challenging affirmative action admissions programs at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) and Harvard College are no exception. Like prior lawsuits, the plaintiff in both cases—Students for Fair Admissions (“SFFA”)—and its amici seek to turn back the clock on racial diversity at selective universities by urging the …

When Amicus Curiae Briefs Are Inimicus Curiae Briefs: Amicus Curiae Briefs And The Bypassing Of Admissibility Standards, David Dematteo, Kellie Wiltsie

American University Law Review

Amicus curiae briefs are being submitted at historically high levels by a range of individuals and entities, and there is compelling evidence that these briefs are highly influential in judicial decision-making, including in the Supreme Court of the United States. Although amicus curiae briefs have been an ingrained aspect of the U.S. legal system for hundred-plus years, various legal scholars, researchers, commentators, and judges, including Supreme Court Justices, have raised concerns about their use, including that amicus curiae briefs contain redundant information and often function as advocacy tools. This Article addresses an aspect of amicus curiae briefs that has received …

Views Of The Irish Judiciary On Technology In Courts: Results Of A Survey, Brian M. Barry Dr, Rónán Kennedy Dr

Articles

Technology continues to transform how judges perform their functions, both in Ireland and elsewhere. This article reports the results of a survey of Irish judges on their use of technology in their role, their attitudes towards technology, and their views on how it impacts on the judicial function. The survey, part of a global survey, found that Irish judges habitually used digital technologies, and were broadly satisfied with the technology available in chambers, but less so with what was provided in courtrooms. Although generally happy to embrace change, the majority of respondents were concerned with, and did not prefer, online …

The Public Defender Movement In The Age Of Mass Incarceration: Georgia's Experience, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

Focusing on the efforts of the Southern Center for Human Rights, this article offers a grassroots history of the creation of the first statewide public defender in the State of Georgia in 2003. Whereas federal court litigation to improve indigent defense failed to achieve lasting reform, a shift in tactics toward “rebellious localism,” characterized by state court lawsuits against county and city officials, succeeded in prodding lawmakers to create a new framework for delivering legal services to indigent defendants. This model of legal change was effective in documenting structural flaws and creating momentum for reform. Yet other conditions—such as front-end …

Sanitation: Reducing The Administrative State’S Control Over Public Health, Lauren R. Roth

Scholarly Works

On April 18, 2022, in Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc. v. Biden, United States District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle vacated the mask mandate issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Following a framework laid out in other decisions restricting CDC actions in response to COVID-19, the court found that the agency lacked statutory authority to protect the public from the virus by requiring mask wearing during travel and at transit hubs because Congress did not intend such a broad grant of power. Countering decades of public health jurisprudence, the federal district court failed to defer to experts and …

Commentary: Dan Mandelker—A Land-Use Legacy Unlike Any Other, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

It is an honor to share thoughts about the importance of Professor Daniel Mandelker’s legacy to the field of land-use and zoning law. The word “legacy” means, among other things, “something that is part of your history or that remains from an earlier time.” At ninety-two, he was the longest actively teaching land use law professor in the United States. His academic career began in 1949 when he was appointed an Assistant Professor at Drake Law School, with relatively short stints at the University of Indiana Law School and Columbia Law School, followed by his appointment at Washington University School …

The Common Law As Statutory Backdrop, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Amidst the whirl of commentary about how the U.S. Supreme Court has become increasingly textualist and what precise shape modern textualism should take, the Court’s continued reliance on one decidedly atextual interpretive tool has gone largely unnoticed — the common law. Indeed, the common law has played an underappreciated, often dispositive, gap-filling role in statutory interpretation for decades, even as the textualist revolution has sidelined other non-text-focused interpretive tools. But despite the persistent role that the common law has played in statutory interpretation cases, the use of common law rules and definitions as an interpretive resource is surprisingly understudied and …

Justice For All: Demanding Accessibility For Underrepresented Communities In The Law: A Roger Williams University Law Review, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Social Media Harms And The Common Law, Leslie Y. Garfield Tenzer

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article finds fault with the judiciaries' failure to create a set of common law norms for social media wrongs. In cases concerning social media harms, the Supreme Court and lower courts have consistently adhered to traditional pre-social media principles, failing to use the power of the common law to create a kind of Internet Justice.

Part I of this article reviews social media history and explores how judicial decisions created a fertile bed for social media harm to blossom. Part II illustrates social media harms across several doctrinal disciplines and highlights judicial reluctance to embrace the realities of social …

The Future Of Digital Justice, Dirk Hartung, Florian Brunnader, Christian Veith, Philipp Plog, Tim Wolters

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Justice systems worldwide are under increasing pressure as legal complexity rises andmore people rightfully demand access to justice. Digital transformation is the key forcourts to keep pace. Digital justice is an immense chance to improve the lives ofmillions of people, but only if the technology is understood and implemented fast.Drivers of Digital JusticeGlobally, the digitalization of justice systems is just beginning and generally laggingbehind the digital transformation of the rest of society. This has led to a widening gapbetween the expected user experience for both consumers and businesses and theactual services provided by the courts.Status quo of Digital Justice TransformationThe …

Courts Without Court, Andrew G. Ferguson

Vanderbilt Law Review

What role does the physical courthouse play in the administration of criminal justice? This Article uses recent experiments with virtual courts to reimagine a future without criminal courthouses at the center. The key insight of this Article is to reveal how integral physical courts are to carceral control and how the rise of virtual courts helps to decenter power away from judges. This Article examines the effects of online courts on defendants, lawyers, judges, witnesses, victims, and courthouse officials and offers a framework for a better and less court-centered future. By studying post-COVID-19 disruptions around traditional conceptions of place, time, …