Courts Commons^™

Communication Indecency: Why The Communications Decency Act, And The Judicial Interpretation Of It, Has Led To A Lawless Internet In The Area Of Defamation, Colby Ferris

Barry Law Review

First, this article explores how law of defamation has been applied in the brick and mortar world, and how those same principles were applied to the cyber world. Next it looks at Congress’s legislation of defamation law on the Internet, and how that legislation has been applied in court. Finally, it evaluates the changing attitude toward that legislation, and changes Congress should consider making.

All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee

College of Law - Faculty Scholarship

This paper contains the introduction to the new book, All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies and the Rule of Law (Stanford University Press, 2010).

The book begins with the observation that Americans are divided in their beliefs about whether courts operate on the basis of unbiased legal principle or of political interest. This division in public opinion in turn breeds suspicion that judges do not actually mean what they say, that judicial professions of impartiality are just fig leaves used to hide the pursuit of partisan purposes.

Comparing law to the practice of common courtesy, the …

Pragmatic Indeterminacy, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

If, as a result of taking Indeterminacy seriously, we revolutionize the way we teach law and the way we select judges, then we will also revolutionize the way cases are litigated (because the new judges will expect to hear a different kind of argumentation) and the way people order their lives in anticipation of the way their disputes will be decided by these new judges.

Book Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism By Alex M Cameron, Dianne Pothier

Dianne Pothier Collection

Alex Cameron’s book, Power Without Law, is a scathing critique of the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1999 decisions in R. v. Marshall upholding Donald Marshall Jr.’s Mi’kmaq treaty claim. Cameron’s book has attracted a lot of attention because of the author’s position as Crown counsel for the government of Nova Scotia. Cameron was not involved as a lawyer in the Marshall case itself. As a fisheries prosecution, Marshall was a matter of federal jurisdiction pursuant to s. 91(12) of the Constitution Act, 1867, 3 and Nova Scotia chose not to intervene. However, Cameron did become involved in a subsequent …

The Communications Decency Act And New York Times V. Sullivan: Providing Public Figure Defamation A Home On The Internet, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 491 (2010), Chris Williams

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The International Criminal Court: From Rome To Kampala, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 515 (2010), Philippe Kirsch

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Should The Icc Prosecutor Exercise His Or Her Discretion? The Role Of Fundamental Ethical Principles, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 553 (2010), Brian D. Lepard

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The International Criminal Court Does Not Have Complete Jurisdiction Over Customary Crimes Against Humanity And War Crimes, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 603 (2010), Jordan J. Paust

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comment On Victor's Justice & The Viability Of Ex Ante Standards, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 569 (2010), Rod Rastan

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Criminal Courts And The Making Of Public International Law: New Roles For International Organizations And Individuals, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 603 (2010), Kenneth S. Gallant

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The International Criminal Court And Proximity To The Scene Of The Crime: Does The Rome Statute Permit All Of The Icc's Trials To Take Place At Local Or Regional Chambers?, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 715 (2010), Stuart K. Ford

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Nuremberg Tribunal V. The Tokyo Tribunal: Designs, Staffs, And Operations, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 753 (2010), Zachary D. Kaufman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

How To Avoid The Constraints Of Rule 10b-5(B): A First Circuit Guide For Underwriters, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 931 (2010), Eric H. Franklin

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Forgotten Namesake: The Illinois Good Samaritan Act's Inexcusable Failure To Provide Immunity To Non-Medical Rescuers, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1097 (2010), David Weldon

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Hobbs Act Through The Rivera-Rivera Looking Glass: A Mere Intrusion Upon Basic Fundamental Federalism Principles?, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 237 (2010), Patrick Goodwin

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

In God We Trust: The Judicial Establishment Of American Civil Religion, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 869 (2010), James J. Knicely, John W. Whitehead

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Second-Class Citizenship: The Tension Between The Supremacy Of The People And Minority Rights, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 963 (2010), Adam H. Morse

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prevention And Complementarity In The International Criminal Court: A Positive Approach, Katharine A. Marshall

Human Rights Brief

No abstract provided.

Conspicuous Logic: Using The Logical Fallacy Of Affirming The Consequent As A Litigation Tool, Stephen M. Rice

Barry Law Review

This article will address one of the specific logical fallacies known as the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent, discuss the place of formal logic in legal reasoning, describe the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent, demonstrate how courts have explicitly used the fallacy in deciding cases, and detail how litigators can use the Fallacy to win cases.

“Runaway Train”: Controlling Crimes Committed By Private Contractors Through Application Of The Uniform Code Of Military Justice, Matthew Dahl

Barry Law Review

This paper will argue that, in the absence of effective alternatives, the new law granting court-martial jurisdiction over civilians is a necessary step in effectively controlling crimes by private contractors and other civilians accompanying U.S. armed forces overseas if other measures are not effectuated. Part II will look at two important Supreme Court decisions that currently restrict the military’s ability to court-martial civilians, and it will also highlight the government’s attempts over the past 50 years to come up with a solution to the problem. Part III will examine three alternatives to the amendment to Article 2(a)(10) that could make …

In The Trenches Of Florida’S War On Gangs: A Framework For Prosecuting Florida’S Anti-Gang Sentence Enhancement Provision, Rodrigo M. Caruço

Barry Law Review

This article discusses how the State of Florida prosecutes under the new sentence enhancement provision of Florida’s anti-gang statute. Part I discusses the general history of the provision. Part II analyzes different state approaches to the enhancement provision. Finally, Part III concludes the article with two recommendations. First, a statutory response that provides all courts in the State with clear direction to implement this provision. Second, a judicial approach for Florida courts to consistently implement a provision that is essential to Florida’s war on criminal gangs.

Addict First, Criminal Second – Addiction Fueled Crimes Should Be Ineligible For The Three-Strikes Penalty, Scott Lindquist

Barry Law Review

The author of this article argues that drug addicts who finance their addiction through crime should be ineligible to receive a prison sentence under a recidivist statute like the three-strikes penalty. Part I introduces the problem, addiction and crime among current prisoners reported by the Department of Justice. Part II discusses Gary Ewing, an addict, a criminal, and a third strike offender. The story of Gary Ewing represents the injustices levied upon an addict/criminal by enhanced sentenced statutes like the three-strikes penalty. Part III is a discussion of the history of repeat offender statutes, primarily focusing on the inception of …

The 'Show' In The 'Show Trial': Contextualizing The Politicization Of The Courtroom, Awol K. Allo

Barry Law Review

Questioning the indifference of the law to its own normative correctness and its claim to legitimacy, this article explores the epistemological and ontological foundations upon which the concept and lexicon of show trial is predicated. By invoking the theory of performativity, the article distinguishes between the different models of show trials to allow for a more complex and nuanced reading of the particular nature of the show in judicial practices often called ‘show trials.’ By emphasizing the peculiarity of the ‘show’ in each ‘show trial’, the article seeks to reconceptualize the ambit of the criminal trial. Arguing against the emphasis …

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 …

A Foothold For Real Democracy In Eastern Europe, Elizabeth R. Sheyn

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Ukraine has never had a criminal or civil jury trial despite the fact that the right to a criminal jury trial is guaranteed by Ukraine's Constitution. The lack of jury trials is one of the factors likely contributing to the corruption and deficiencies inherent in Ukraine's judicial system. This Article argues that Ukraine can and should make room for juries in its judicial system and proposes a framework for both criminal and civil jury trials. Although the use of juries will not remedy all of the problems plaguing Ukraine, it could bring the country closer to achieving a truly democratic …

Decisional Sequencing, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

Judicial decisionmaking consists of two sets of choices – (1) how to resolve the issues in a case and (2) how to decide the order in which those issues will be resolved. Much legal scholarship focuses on the first question; too little focuses on the second. This Article aims to fill that gap. Drawing across disciplines – philosophy, economics and political science – this Article articulates a theory of “decisional sequencing.” Decisional sequencing concerns the extent to which legal rules constrain – and do not constrain – the order in which judges and other quasi-judicial actors (like arbitrators) decide matters …

Structure And Precedent, Jeffrey C. Dobbins

Michigan Law Review

The standard model of vertical precedent is part of the deep structure of our legal system. Under this model, we rarely struggle with whether a given decision of a court within a particular hierarchy is potentially binding at all. When Congress or the courts alter the standard structure and process offederal appellate review, however, that standard model of precedent breaks down. This Article examines several of these unusual appellate structures and highlights the difficulties associated with evaluating the precedential effect of decisions issued within them. For instance, when Congress consolidates challenges to agency decision making in a single federal circuit, …

Integration Matters: Rethinking The Architecture Of International Dispute Resolution, Anna Spain

Publications

International law promotes global peace and security by providing mechanisms for the pacific settlement of international disputes. This Article examines these mechanisms and their place in the architecture of the international dispute resolution ("IDR") system. The Article identifies three core deficiencies of the IDR system that limit its effectiveness and capacity. First, the international legal system has prioritized the development of adjudication over other forms of dispute resolution; the judicialization of international disputes and the proliferation of courts and tribunals evidence this. However, adjudication is limited in its capacity to resolve disputes that involve non-state parties and extra-legal issues. This …

Finding Fault With Defaults: New York Courts' Inconsistent Application Of Issue Preclusion To Default Judgments, David Noland

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

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. …