Law Commons^™

Appellate Review Of Trial Court Decisions, J. Smithburn

J. Eric Smithburn

Understanding the different standards of review is necessary to the lawyer's informed reading of the appellate opinion. Further, the lawyer should use standard of review to discuss with the client the nature of the trial court's decision and the likelihood of success on review. If the client understands the difference between questions of law, which are reviewed de novo, and discretionary decisions, which are generally deferred to unless unreasonable, he or she will form realistic expectations about the trial and whether to consider an appeal. This casebook discusses the role of appellate courts and the history of appellate review and …

Constitutional Existence Conditions And Judicial Review, Michael Dorf, Matthew Adler

Michael C. Dorf

Although critics of judicial review sometimes call for making the entire Constitution nonjusticiable, many familiar norms of constitutional law state what we call "existence conditions" that are necessarily enforced by judicial actors charged with the responsibility of applying, and thus as a preliminary step, identifying, propositions of sub-constitutional law such as statutes. Article I, Section 7, which sets forth the procedures by which a bill becomes a law, is an example: a putative law that did not go through the Article I, Section 7 process and does not satisfy an alternative test for legal validity (such as the treaty-making provision …

American Law Of Zoning, Patricia Salkin

Patricia E. Salkin

No abstract provided.

Reforming Surveillance Law: The Swiss Model., Susan Freiwald, Sylvain Méille

Susan Freiwald

As implemented over the past twenty-seven years, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“ECPA”), which regulates electronic surveillance by law enforcement agents, has become incomplete, confusing, and ineffective. In contrast, a new Swiss law, CrimPC, regulates law enforcement surveillance in a more comprehensive, uniform, and effective manner. This Article compares the two approaches and argues that recent proposals to reform ECPA in a piecemeal fashion will not suffice. Instead, Swiss CrimPC presents a model for more fundamental reform of U.S. law.

This Article is the first to analyze the Swiss law with international eyes and demonstrate its advantages over the U.S. …

Illegal Emigration: The Continuing Life Of Invalid Deportation Orders, Richard Frankel

Richard H. Frankel

Federal appeals courts overturn more than one thousand deportation orders every year. A significant number of those reversals involve non-citizens who are abroad because they have been deported as a result of losing their cases at the administrative level. Although an order overturning a deportation order ordinarily restores non-citizens to their prior status of being lawfully present in the United States, federal immigration authorities have used the fact of the non-citizen’s now-invalidated deportation to subject such non-citizens to a new and previously inapplicable set of standards that effectively prevents them from returning. Under this practice, non-citizens who seek to return …

Marbury Versus Madison: Documents And Commentary, Mark Graber, Michael Perhac

Mark Graber

Marbury versus Madison combines documents and analytical essays timed for the bicentennial year (2003) of one of the most important Supreme Court cases. This timely collection will explain: the constitutional, political, philosophical background to judicial review the historical record leading to this landmark case the impact of the decision since 1803 its impact on the world stage, especially for new and emerging democratic nations. Also includes a listing of all the Supreme Court cases citing Marbury an an annotated Marbury v. Madison.

Fitting The Formula For Judicial Review: The Law-Fact Distinction In Immigration Law, Rebecca Sharpless

Rebecca Sharpless

The ill-defined law-fact distinction often stands as the gatekeeper to judicial review of an agency deportation order, restricting non-citizens facing deportation to raising only questions of law when appearing before an appellate court. The restriction on review most affects cases whose dispositions typically turn on the resolution of factual issues, including claims under Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture and claims for discretionary relief from deportation like cancellation of removal. Convention Against Torture claims, for example, often involve extensive fact-finding on the part of the immigration judge regarding conditions in the applicant’s home country and the applicant’s personal circumstances. …

"Streamlining" The Rule Of Law: How The Department Of Justice Is Undermining Judicial Review Of Agency Action, Shruti Rana

Shruti Rana

Judicial review of administrative decision making is an essential institutional check on agency power. Recently, however, the Department of Justice dramatically revised its regulations in an attempt to insulate its decision making from public and federal court scrutiny. These “streamlining” rules, carried out in the name of national security and immigration reform, have led to a breakdown in the rule of law in our judicial system. While much attention has been focused on the Department of Justice’s recent attempts to shield executive power from the reach of Congress, its efforts to undermine judicial review have so far escaped such scrutiny. …

James Buchanan As Savior? Judicial Power, Political Fragmentation, And The Failed 1831 Repeal Of Section 25, Mark Graber

Mark Graber

James Buchanan is often credited with being the unlikely savior of judicial review in early Jacksonian America. In 1831, Buchanan, then a representative from Pennsylvania, issued a minority report criticizing the proposed repeal of Section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that is generally credited with convincing a skeptical Congress that fundamental constitutional norms required federal judicial oversight of state courts and state legislatures. This paper claims that federalism and political fragmentation were more responsible than James Buchanan for the failed repeal of Section 25, for the maintenance of judicial power in the United States during the transition from …

A Broader View Of The Immigration Adjudication Problem, Jill Family

Jill E. Family

Networks Of Heightened Scrutiny In Corporate Law, Reza Dibadj

Reza Dibadj

This Article is a follow-up to a previous article, Networks of Fairness Review in Corporate Law (Fairness). After an overview of the fundamentals of the fairness standard and network theory, Fairness deployed network and statistical analyses to conduct an empirical study of the fairness doctrine as articulated by the Delaware Supreme Court and the Delaware Court of Chancery. This initial analysis focused on the fairness standard for one principal reason: it is considered to be the most plaintiff-friendly standard of review, in marked distinction to the well-known business judgment rule (BJR). But there are also four other prominent standards of …

Arbitration And Choice: Taking Charge Of The 'New Litigation', Thomas J. Stipanowich

Thomas J. Stipanowich

Despite meaningful efforts to promote better practices and ensure quality among arbitrators and advocates, criticism of American arbitration is at a crescendo. Much of this criticism stems from the fact that arbitration under standard procedures has taken on the trappings of litigation - extensive discovery and motion practice, highly contentious advocacy, long cycle time and high cost. Paradoxically, concerns about the absence of appeal on the merits in arbitration have caused some to craft provisions calling for judicial review for errors of law or fact in awards. It is time to return to fundamentals in American arbitration. Those who seek …

Abuse And Discretion: Evaluating Judicial Discretion In Custody Cases Involving Violence Against Women, Dana Harrington Conner

Dana Harrington Conner

This Article is an exploration of the history and creation of the broad power of the custody trial judge, the unsatisfactory standards applied in custody cases involving violence against women, and our system’s inability to adequately review flawed decisions at the appellate level. The Article deconstructs both the process of judicial decision-making at the trial court level in custody cases involving batterers and the standards applied to these cases at the appellate court stage. In addition, the Article also proposes a multi-level approach to resolving the domestic violence dilemma in a custody case.

History confirms that the custody trial judge …

What's Wrong With Judicial Supremacy? What's Right About Judicial Review?, Robert Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

Skepticism concerning the legitimacy of judicial review typically occurs without distinguishing between judicial review and judicial supremacy. The former gives the Court a say in evaluating the constitutionality of legislation and other government conduct. The latter gives the Court the final say over these matters. This Article defends the Court's role in judicial review but rejects the practice of judicial supremacy. The Article first critically examines some of the more important attempts to justify judicial supremacy and finds them wanting. It then explains why judicial review, as the practice of applying American political philosophical concepts such as federalism, the separation …

Stripping Judicial Review During Immigration Reform: The Certificate Of Reviewability, Jill E. Family

Jill E. Family

Book Review(Reviewing Arguing Marbury V. Madison (Mark Tushnet Ed., 2005), Robert Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

No abstract provided.