Law Commons^™

Rhetoric Versus Reality In Arbitration Jurisprudence: How The Supreme Court Flaunts And Flunks Contracts (And Why Contracts Teachers Need Not Teach The Cases), Lawrence A. Cunningham

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Supreme Court rhetoric about the role of contracts and contract law in arbitration jurisprudence differs sharply from the reality of its applications. In the name of contracts, the Court administers a self-declared national policy favoring arbitration, a policy directly benefiting the judicial branch of government. This often puts the Court’s preferences ahead of those of contracting parties while declaring its mission as solely to enforce contracts in accordance with contract law. The Court thus cloaks in the rhetoric of volition a policy in tension with constitutionally-pedigreed access to justice and venerable principles of federalism.

This Article documents the rhetoric-reality gap …

Towards A Jurisprudence Of Hybridity, Paul Schiff Berman

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Debates about non-state normative communities often devolve into clashes between two polarized positions. On the one hand, we see the desire to eradicate difference through forced obeisance to a single overarching state norm. On the other, we see claims of complete autonomy for non-state lawmaking, as if such non-state communities could plausibly exist in isolation from the communities that both surround and intersect them.

Neither of these positions takes seriously the importance of engagement and dialogue across difference. Navigating difference doesn’t require either assimilation or separation; it requires negotiation. Legal pluralists have long charted this process of negotiation, noting, for …

Traditional Versus Economic Analysis: Evidence From Cardozo And Posner Torts Opinions, Lawrence A. Cunningham

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This Article contributes a new approach and evidence to the longstanding debate concerning the relative merits of traditional legal analysis compared to contemporary economic analysis of law. It evaluates prominent opinions of two judicial exemplars of the contending conceptions, the traditionalist Benjamin Cardozo and the economist Richard Posner, in torts, the field where economic analysis has greatest impact. Comparative critique of their opinions appearing in current torts casebooks, where they are the most ubiquitous judges, provides evidence that traditional legal analysis is a more capacious and persuasive basis of justification than contemporary economic analysis of law.

The Jurisprudence Of Human Rights Tribunals On Remedies For Human Rights Violations, Dinah L. Shelton

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This essay reviews the power of international human rights bodies to award remedies to parties before them. The essay looks first at the duties and obligations of states to afford remedies in domestic law. It then examines the express and implied remedial powers of human rights institutions and then discusses the various types of remedies that have been afforded by different international bodies. Finally, it notes how these remedies have evolved over time and suggests possible ways in which the law may develop in the future.

The Multistate Bar Exam As A Theory Of Law, Daniel J. Solove

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

What if the Bar Exam were read as a work of jurisprudence? What is its theory of law? How does the Bar Exam compare to works of jurisprudence by H.L.A. Hart, Ronald Dworkin, Karl Llewellyn, and others? This short tongue-in-cheek book review of the Bar Exam seeks to answer these questions. Each year, thousands of lawyers-to-be ponder over it, learning its profound teachings on the meaning of the law. They study it for months, devoting more time to it than practically any other jurisprudential text. It therefore comes as a great surprise that such a widely read and studied work …

The Seventh Amendment Right To A Civil Jury Trial: The Supreme Court Giveth And The Supreme Court Taketh Away, Joan E. Schaffner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This article examines the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence relating to the historic Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. I describe the three-prong analysis that the Court employs, analyze the Court’s decisions that analyze the jury trial, and conclude that the Court’s decisions are consistent with its Seventh Amendment line of cases in which it emphasizes the preservation of the basic right to jury under the first inquiry, while it de-emphasizes the essence and scope of that right under the second and third inquiries.

Postures Of Judging: An Exploration Of Judicial Decisionmaking, Daniel J. Solove

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This article pits Ronald Dworkin against Fyodor Dostoyevsky. The article critiques Ronald Dworkin's answer to the question of fit: how judges reconcile general legal rules with particular situations. Dworkin's heavy focus on legal principles under-emphasizes the importance of facts in judicial decisionmaking. Exploring how judges approach the question of fit from a more literary perspective, the article examines the posture of a judge - a judge's physical and temporal position in relation to the cases she adjudicates, a position which affects the level of generality with which a judge perceives the facts of a case and directly influences a judge's …