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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

How The Dissent Becomes The Majority: Using Federalism To Transform Coalitions In The U.S. Supreme Court, Tonja Jacobi, Vanessa A. Baird Jan 2009

How The Dissent Becomes The Majority: Using Federalism To Transform Coalitions In The U.S. Supreme Court, Tonja Jacobi, Vanessa A. Baird

Faculty Articles

This Article proposes that dissenting Supreme Court Justices provide cues in their written opinions about how future litigants can reframe case facts and legal arguments in similar future cases to garner majority support. Questions of federal-state power cut across most other substantive legal issues, and this can provide a mechanism for splitting existing majorities in future cases. By signaling to future litigants when this potential exists, dissenting judges can transform a dissent into a majority in similar future cases.

We undertake an empirical investigation of dissenting opinions in which the dissenting Justice suggests that future cases ought to be framed …


Ideology And Exceptionalism In Intellectual Property: An Empirical Study, Matthew Sag, Tonja Jacobi, Maxim Sytch Jan 2009

Ideology And Exceptionalism In Intellectual Property: An Empirical Study, Matthew Sag, Tonja Jacobi, Maxim Sytch

Faculty Articles

In this Article, we examine the effect of judicial ideology on IP case outcomes before the Supreme Court from 1954 to 2006. We find that ideology is a significant determinant of IP cases: the more conservative a justice is, the more likely he or she is to vote in favor of recognizing and enforcing rights to intellectual property. We also find evidence that the relationship is more complex than a purely ideological account would suggest; our results suggest that law matters too. We find that a number of factors that are specific to IP are also consequential. Additionally, we show …


Trivialising Justice: Reservation Under The Rule Of Law, Ashok Agrwaal Jan 2009

Trivialising Justice: Reservation Under The Rule Of Law, Ashok Agrwaal

Ashok Agrwaal

The idea for the paper was born out of a consultation called by the Calcutta Research Group (CRG), on critically engaging with the issue of social justice in India. The discussions ranged over a broad spectrum, from the gritty essence of social justice issues in daily life, to theoretical constructs based upon accepted cannons, to the notion of examining the matter afresh, from first principles. After several false starts, I realised that I was allowing the vastness of the issue to overwhelm me. Finally, I decided to choose a theme and strictly adhere to the limitations imposed by my choice. …


Social Movements And Judging: An Essay On Institutional Reform Litigation And Desegregation In Dallas, Texas, Darren L. Hutchinson Jan 2009

Social Movements And Judging: An Essay On Institutional Reform Litigation And Desegregation In Dallas, Texas, Darren L. Hutchinson

Faculty Articles

This Article discusses the political and legal barriers that have surfaced to undermine the ability of courts to fashion remedies that offer justice to aggrieved individuals and to render rights-based institutional reform liti­gation a judicial relic. Part II examines the historical development of in­stitutional reform litigation and examines the political factors that created the opportunity for dramatic changes in legal approaches to the issue of racial inequality. Part III examines litigation challenging segregation in Dallas public schools. It also discusses cases filed in the immediate post­-Brown era and contrasts those cases with Judge Sanders's rulings on the subject. In …


The Conscience Of A Court, Girardeau A. Spann Jan 2009

The Conscience Of A Court, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author explains his conclusion that the Supreme Court, as a matter of conscience, considers racial discrimination to be good for America. That conclusion, he argues, offers the only plausible account of the Court's repeated insistence on displacing populist efforts to promote racial equality with the Court's own, more-regressive, version of expedient racial politics. Although the Court has had what is at best a checkered history when called upon to adjudicate claims of racial injustice, until now, the contemporary Court might arguably have been accorded the benefit of the doubt. But after its five-to-four ruling in the 2007 Resegregation case, …