Law Commons^™

A Different “Enlightened” Jurisprudence?, David R. Loy

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The End Of Originalism, Jeffrey Shaman

College of Law Faculty

This essay maintains that originalism—the idea that the Constitution should be interpreted according to its original meaning--is nearing its demise. Ironically, the beginning of the end of originalism may have been prompted by the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, marking the first time that a majority of the Court signed onto an opinion emphatically taking an originalist slant. Heller may represent the apogee of originalism and, because it exposes the fundamental flaws of originalism, may also mark the beginning of its decline.

Originalism is a radical departure from the Supreme Court’s well-established jurisprudence of a living …

Impartiality: Balancing Personal And Professional Integrity In Judicial Decisionmaking, Sarah M. R. Cravens

Akron Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Science, Public Bioethics, And The Problem Of Integration, O. Carter Snead

Journal Articles

Public bioethics — the governance of science, medicine, and biotechnology in the name of ethical goods — is an emerging area of American law. The field uniquely combines scientific knowledge, moral reasoning, and prudential judgments about democratic decision making. It has captured the attention of officials in every branch of government, as well as the American public itself. Public questions (such as those relating to the law of abortion, the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, and the regulation of end-of-life decision making) continue to roil the public square.

This Article examines the question of how scientific methods and …

Stare Decisis As Judicial Doctrine, Randy J. Kozel

Journal Articles

Stare decisis has been called many things, among them a principle of policy, a series of prudential and pragmatic considerations, and simply the preferred course. Often overlooked is the fact that stare decisis is also a judicial doctrine, an analytical system used to guide the rules of decision for resolving concrete disputes that come before the courts.

This Article examines stare decisis as applied by the U.S. Supreme Court, our nation’s highest doctrinal authority. A review of the Court’s jurisprudence yields two principal lessons about the modern doctrine of stare decisis. First, the doctrine is comprised largely of malleable factors …

The Person In Law, The Number In Math: Improved Analysis Of The Subject As Foundation For A Noveau Régime , Orlando I. Martínez-García

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Of State, Market And Justice: Latcritical Challenges To Theory, Praxis And Policy, Francisco Valdes

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Human Rights Without Foundations, Joseph Raz

Faculty Scholarship

This is a good time for human rights. Not that they are respected more than in the past. The flagrant resort to kidnapping, arbitrary arrests, and torture by the United States of America (USA), and the unprecedented restriction of individual freedom in the USA, and in Great Britain (GB), cast doubt about that. It is a good time for human rights in that claims about such rights are used more widely in the conduct of world affairs than before. There are declarations of and treaties about human rights, international courts and tribunals with jurisdiction over various human right violations. They …

Finding A Footing: A Theological Perspective On Law And The Work Of Joseph Vining, John L. Mccausland

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Law's Melody, Jack L. Sammons

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Justice Stevens' Temperance, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

On the last opinion day of the last of his 35 Terms on the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul Stevens issued his valedictory opinion, a 57-page dissent in McDonald v. City of Chicago. Justice Stevens laid out an expansive vision of constitutional interpretation that Justice Alito aptly called "eloquent" in his plurality opinion. Not one for sentimental farewells, Justice Scalia was less generous: "Justice Stevens' approach," he wrote in the last line of his concurring opinion," puts democracy in peril."

Good Enough For Government Work: The Interpretation Of Positive Constitutional Rights In State Constitutions, Jeffrey Omar Usman

Law Faculty Scholarship

The United States Supreme Court ruled in DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) and reaffirmed in Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) that absent conditions of confinement the Due Process Clause imposes no affirmative obligations upon government to protect an individual’s life, liberty, or property. These decisions reflect the Supreme Court’s broader understanding of the United States Constitution as a guarantor of negative rights but devoid of assurance of positive rights. Like the constitutions of many other countries, state constitutions have charted a different course. Unlike their federal counterpart, state …

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.

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 …

Review Of Law At The Vanishing Point By Aaron Fichtelberg, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

This is a largely critical review of Professor Aaron Fichtelberg’s philosophical analysis of international law. The centerpiece of the book’s affirmative agenda, a “non-reductionist” definition of international law that purports to elide various forms of international law skepticism, strikes the reviewer as circular, misguided in general, and, in its application to substantive international legal issues, difficult to distinguish from a rote form of legal positivism. Law at the Vanishing Point’s avowed empirical methodology and critical agenda, while largely unobjectionable, offer little that has not been said before, often with equal if not greater force. I commend the author’s effort to …

Philosophical Legal Ethics: Ethics, Morals, And Jurisprudence, Alice Woolley, W. Bradley Wendel, William H. Simon, Stephen Pepper, Daniel Markovitz, Katherine R. Kruse, Tim Dare

Faculty Scholarship

The authors and moderator David Luban participated in a plenary session of the International Legal Ethics Conference IV, held at Stanford. Each author answered and discussed questions arising from short papers they had written about the principal concern of legal ethics was the morality of lawyers, the morality of clients, or the morality of laws?

Those papers, which are to be published in Legal Ethics, are compiled here, along with the question and background information with which the panelists were provided.

Inter-American System, Claudia Martin

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Introduction To The South Dakota Law Review's 2010 Symposium Issue, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Echoes Of The Impact Of Webb V. Mcgowin On The Doctrine Of Consideration Under Contract Law: Some Reflections On The Decision On The Approach Of Its 75th Anniversary, Stephen J. Leacock

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Imagining Judges That Apply Law: How They Might Do It, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

"Judges should apply the law, not make it." That plea appears perennially in American politics. American legal scholars belittle it as a simple-minded demand that is silly and misleading. A glance beyond our shores dispels the notion that the American public is naive to expect judges to apply rather than to make law.

American obsession with judicial lawmaking has its price: indifference to judicial law applying. If truth be told, practically we have no method for judges, as a matter of routine, to apply law to facts. Our failure leads American legal scholars to question whether applying law to facts …

Refuge From A Jurisprudence Of Doubt: Hohfeldian Analysis Of Constitutional Law, Allen Thomas O'Rourke

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

The National Class As Extraterritorial Legislation, Jeffrey Haylock

Dalhousie Law Journal

This article argues that provincially constituted multijurisdictional class actions violate the constitutional law of extraterritoriality. It begins with a brief overview of the lawof adjudicativejurisdiction, then provides a longer overviewof the separate body of law that imposes extraterritorial limits on substantive provincial legislation. The author then demonstrates the substantive characterof classaction legislation, which necessarily entails the applicability of the law ofextraterritoriality However, much of the relevant jurisprudence, as well as some of the relevant academic literature, has ignored this important issue.Application ofthe lawofextraterritoriality does, indeed, raise serious constitutional concerns, as the article's central section demonstrates. The desirable efficiencies of national …

Justice In Time, Robert C. Hockett

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Challenges raised by the subject of intergenerational justice seem often to be thought almost uniquely intractable. In particular, apparent conflicts between the core values of impartiality and efficiency raised by a large and still growing number of intertemporal impossibility results derived by Koopmans, Diamond, Basu & Mitra, and others have been taken to foreclose fruitful policy assessment done with a view to the distant future.

This Essay aims to dispel the sense of bewilderment, pessimism and attendant paralysis that afflicts intertemporal justice assessment. It works toward that end by demonstrating that the most vexing puzzles raised by questions of intergenerational …

The Context Of Ideology: Law, Politics, And Empirical Legal Scholarship, Carolyn Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

In their confirmation hearings, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Sotomayor both articulated a vision of the neutral judge who decides cases without resort to personal perspectives or opinions, in short, without ideology. At the other extreme, the dominant model of judicial decisionmaking in political science has long been the attitudinal model, which posits that the Justices’ votes can be explained primarily as expressions of their personal policy preferences, with little or no role for law, legal reasoning, or legal doctrine.

Many traditional legal scholars have criticized such scholarship for its insistence on the primacy of ideology in judicial decisionmaking, even …

Book Review: The Iraq War And International Law, Maxwell O. Chibundu

Faculty Scholarship

A review of The Iraq War and International Law edited by Phil Shiner and Andrew Williams. Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2008.

Judging Jena's Da: The Prosecutor And Racial Esteem, Andrew E. Taslitz

School of Law Faculty Publications

In the Jena 6 case, six African-American high school students were arrested for assault charges allegedly arising out of a series of confrontations between black and white students stemming from a black student's sitting under the "white tree" on school grounds. The Jena prosecutor successfully arranged for one of the Jena 6 to be tried as an adult, where he was convicted and exposed to the potential of a very harsh sentence. The prosecutor did not, however, proceed, or not proceed as harshly, against several white students who were purportedly involved in violence or threats of violence against black students. …

The Pros And Cons Of Politically Reversible 'Semisubstantive' Constitutional Rules, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Most observers of constitutional adjudication believe that it works in an all-or-nothing way. On this view, the substance of challenged rules is of decisive importance, so that political decision makers may resuscitate invalidated laws only by way of constitutional amendment. This conception of constitutional law is incomplete. In fact, courts often use so-called “semisubstantive” doctrines that focus on the processes that nonjudicial officials have used in adopting constitutionally problematic rules. When a court strikes down a rule by using a motive-centered or legislative-findings doctrine, for example, political decision makers may revive that very rule without need for a constitutional amendment. …

Equality, Conscience, And The Liberty Of The Church: Justifying The Controversiale Per Controversialius, Patrick Mckinley Brennan

Working Paper Series

This paper considers the central normative claim of Martha Nussbaum’s Liberty of Conscience: In Defense of America’s Tradition of Religious Equality, viz., that the U.S. Constitution’s religion clauses should be construed to provide equal (and extensive) protection to the vulnerable human faculty called conscience. The paper argues that Nussbaum’s argument from Rawlsian political liberalism that leads to her normative constitutional claim amounts, perversely, to an attempt to justify the controversial by the more controversial. The paper goes on to argue that while equality and conscience are concepts that are reasonably contested, Nussbaum illegitimately gives them priority over the also reasonably …

Demographics And Distrust: The Eleventh Circuit On Graduation Prayer In Adler V. Duval CountY, Paul Horwitz

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Emotional Common Sense As Constitutional Law, Terry A. Maroney

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Gonzales v. Carhart the Supreme Court invoked post-abortion regret to justify a ban on a particular abortion procedure. The Court was proudly folk-psychological, representing its observations about women's emotional experiences as "self-evident." That such observations could drive critical legal determinations was, apparently, even more self-evident, as it received no mention at all. Far from being sui generis, Carhart reflects a previously unidentified norm permeating constitutional jurisprudence: reliance on what this Article coins "emotional common sense." Emotional common sense is what one unreflectively thinks she knows about the emotions. A species of common sense, it seems obvious and universal to …