Courts Commons^™

Making Biomedical Policy Through Constitutional Adjudication:The Example Of Physician-Assisted Suicide, Carl E. Scheider

Book Chapters

Throughout most of American history no one would have supposed biomedical policy could or should be made through constitutional adjudication. No one would have thought that the Constitution spoke to biomedical issues, that those issues were questions of federal policy, or that judges were competent to handle them. Today, however, the resurgence of substantive due process has swollen the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment, the distinction between federal and state spheres is tattered, and few statutes escape judicial vetting. Furthermore, Abraham Lincoln's wish that the Constitution should "become the political religion of the nation" has been granted. "We now reverently …

On The Meaning And Impact Of The Physician-Assisted Suicide Cases, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

I read every newspaper article I could find on the meaning and impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's June 1997 decisions in Washington v Glucksberg and Vacco v Quill. I came away with the impression that some proponents of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) were unable or unwilling publicly to recognize the magnitude of the setback they suffered when the Court handed down its rulings in the PAS cases.

Taking Regulatory Takings Personally: The Perils Of (Mis)Reasoning By Analogy, Michael Allan Wolf

Law Faculty Publications

In a troublesome area of the law, it is hard for a legal academic to resist the temptation to attempt to "enlighten" the judiciary. It has not been the author's practice to date, in ruminating on the profound puzzle of regulatory takings, to instruct judges concerning the errors of their ways. Because only an insider can be truly familiar with the nuances of a specific legal challenge and owing to a deep respect for the judicial craft, this writer has resisted the urge to preach. It has been a sufficiently provocative challenge to interpret the meanings and implications of decisions …

Judicial Lobbying At The Wto: The Debate Over The Use Of Amicus Curiae Briefs And The U.S. Experience, Padideh Ala'i

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The continuing debate over the use of amicus curiae briefs at the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) raises interesting questions about the influence of the U.S. legal system on the WTO dispute settlement process. Specifically, it brings to the surface differences between legal cultures and the fact that the U.S. legal culture with its emphasis on procedure is not readily transferable to the WTO. Comparing the controversy regarding the use of amicus curiae briefs before WTO Panels and the Appellate Body with the history and evolution of the institution of amicus curiae before the U.S. Supreme Court may help explain the …

Reanimator: Mark Tushnet And The Second Coming Of The Imperial Presidency, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Private Remedies For Public Wrongs Under Section 5 (Symposium: New Directions In Federalism), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

The Supreme Court has ushered in the new millennium with a renewed emphasis on federalism-based limits to Congress's regulatory authority in general, and Congress's Section 5 power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment in particular. In a recent string of cases, the Court has refined and narrowed Section 5's enforcement power in two significant ways.1 First, the Court made clear that Congress lacks the authority to interpret the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment's substantive provisions themselves, and may only "enforce" the judiciary's definition of Fourteenth Amendment violations. 2 Second, the Court embraced a relatively stringent requirement concerning the relationship between means …

Strategic Voting On Multimember Courts, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

In appellate adjudication, decisions are rendered by a multimember court as a collective entity, not by individual judges. Yet legal scholars have only just begun to explore the formal and informal processes by which individual votes are transformed into a collective judgment. In particular, they have paid insufficient attention to the ways in which the vote of each individual judge is influenced by the views of her colleagues on a multimember court.

Uncoupling The Law Of Takings, Michael A. Heller, James E. Krier

Articles

The law of takings couples together matters that should be treated independently. The conventional view, shared by courts and commentators alike, has been that any takings case can be resolved in one of two ways: either there is a taking and compensation is due, or there is no taking and no compensation is due. These results are fine as long as one holding or the other serves the two central concerns of the Takings Clause - eficiency and justice. But a problem arises when the two purposes behind the law of takings come into cordhct, as they readily might. It …

An Essay On Texas V. Lesage, Christina B. Whitman

Articles

When I was invited to participate in this symposium, I was asked to discuss whether the causation defense developed in Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle applied to cases challenging state action under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. As I argue below, it seems clear that Mt. Healthy does apply to equal protection cases. The Supreme Court explicitly so held last November in Texas v. Lesage. But the implications of Lesage go beyond questions of causation. The opinion suggests that the Court may be rethinking (or ignoring) its promise in Carey v. Piphus …

Refugee Rights Are Not Negotiable, James C. Hathaway, Anne K. Cusick

Articles

America's troubled relationship with international law, in particular human rights law, is well documented. In many cases, the United States simply will not agree to be bound by international human rights treaties. For example, the United States has yet to ratify even such fundamental agreements as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. When the United States does agree to become a party to an international human rights treaty, it has often sought to condition its acceptance …

Dna As Evidence: Viewing Science Through The Prism Of The Law, Peter Donnelly, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In this article, we analyze a problem related to DNA evidence that is likely to be of great and increasing significance in the near future. This is the problem of whether, and how, to present evidence that the suspect has been identified through a DNA database search. In our view, the two well-known reports on DNA evidence issued by the National Research Council (NRC) have been badly mistaken in their analysis of this problem. The mistakes are significant because the reports have carried great authority with American courts; moreover, the DNA Advisory Board of the FBI has endorsed the second …

Contract Reading' In Labor Arbitration, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

A quarter century ago, I used the phrase "contract reader" to characterize the role an arbitrator plays in construing a collective bargaining agreement. This phrase has almost invariable been misunderstood to refer to reading or interpreting the contract. When I spoke of the "contract reader," it was in the context of judicial review of an award. My point was this: When a court has before it an arbitrator's award applying a collective bargaining agreement, it is as if the employer and the union had signed a stipulation stating: "What the arbitrator says this contract means is exactly what we meant …

Cardozo The [Small R] Realist, Richard D. Friedman

Reviews

In Part I of this Review, I will discuss aspects of Cardozo's life and character. In Part II, I will discuss Cardozo's jurisprudential theory as revealed in his lectures and essays. In Part IlI, I will suggest how we gain a better perspective on his judicial opinions by understanding not only that theory but also the man and his life.

Brief Amici Curiae Of Christian Legal Society And The National Association Of Evangelicals In Support Of Respondent, Kimberlee Wood Colby, Gregory S. Baylor, Carl H. Esbeck, Richard W. Garnett, Michael Stokes Paulsen

Court Briefs

No. 99-138
Jenifer and Gary Troxel v. Tommie Granville

From the Summary of the Argument

Our argument that the decision below should be affirmed rests on a few basic points, none of which necessarily prejudices the case for a grandparent-visitation statute that is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. First, the statutes at issue are not grandparent-visitation statutes. Even if they were, the Petitioners and their amici have not pointed to any other visitation statutes that share the objectionable and unconstitutional features of Washington's particular statutes.

Brief Of The National Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Lisa Kemler, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 99-116
Jeffrey Allan Fischer v. United States of America

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

From the Summary of the Argument

We agree with the Petitioner that the Court of Appeals misread Section 666(b). Section 666 was designed to protect the integrity of federal funds by outlawing bribery in connection with the administration of those funds, and the plain meaning of the language the statute employs is adequate to achieve that purpose. The Court of Appeals, on the other hand, exploded the well defined limits that the statute's text imposes …

Brief Amicus Curiae Of The Society Of Catholic Social Scientists In Support Of Respondent, Stephen M. Krason, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 99-138
Jenifer Troxel v. Tommie Granville

On Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of Washington

From the Summary of the Argument

The fundamental rights of parents to direct and control the upbringing of their children and the autonomy of the family have been recognized time and again by this Court. These rights and this autonomy are not creatures of positive law, but are grounded in the natural moral order. The family is the "building block" of civil society and has as its natural end, or telos, the nurturing and development of flourishing human persons and good citizens. …

Constitutional Law -- Due Process Clause -- Third Circuit Holds That $50 Million Punitive Damages Award In Context Of A $48 Million Compensatory Award Is Unconstitutionally Excessive -- Inter Medical Supplies, Ltd. V. Ebi Medical Systems, Inc., 181 F.3d 446 (3d Cir. 1999)., A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

In 1996, the Supreme Court, in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, struck down a punitive damages award on the ground that it was "grossly excessive" in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . Since BMW, many courts have faced the challenge of applying its principles to determine whether punitive damages awards surpass the constitutional limit. Last June, in Inter Medical Supplies, Ltd. v. EBI Medical Systems, Inc., the Third Circuit faced this difficulty when it considered whether a $50 million punitive damages award, granted in conjunction with a $48 million compensatory damages award, was …

Petitioners' Reply Brief, William H. Meub, Orland Campbell Jr., Richard W. Garnett, Michael Stokes Paulsen

Court Briefs

No. 99-628
Cynthia Andrews v. Vermont Department of Education

On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Vermont Supreme Court

From the Petitioners' Reply Brief

The question presented in this case is whether the First Amendment allows government to discriminate on the basis of religion in funding school-choice education programs that include private schools. In the Petition, we showed (1) that this issue is nationally important; (2) that this issue is recurrent; and (3) that this issue has generated extraordinary and pervasive conflicts among lower and federal state courts, and between decisions of lower courts and this Court.

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, William H. Meub, Orland Campbell Jr., Richard W. Garnett, Michael Stokes Paulsen

Court Briefs

No. 99-628
Cynthia and Douglas Andrews v. Chittenden Town School District

On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Vermont Supreme Court

From the Reasons for Granting the Writ

This is a case about discrimination - discrimination against "religious ideas, religious people, [and] religious schools." Board of Educ. of Kiryas Joel v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687, 717 (1994) (O'Connor, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment). Vermont provides an immensely valuable benefit - tuition - to eligible residents and their high-school-age children. Petitioners have been denied this educational benefit solely because they have chosen a religious …

Citizen Suits Under The Resource Conservation And Recovery Act: Plotting Abstention On A Map Of Federalism, Charlotte Gibson

Michigan Law Review

In the shadow of the Supreme Court's constitutional federalism doctrines, lower federal courts have developed doctrines of common law federalism through vehicles such as abstention. In the environmental law arena, courts have employed a number of abstention theories to dismiss citizen suits brought under federal statutes. The appearance of primary jurisdiction and Burford abstention in citizen suits brought under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA") exemplifies this trend. In rejecting RCRA suits, some courts have relied on primary jurisdiction, a doctrine conceived as a mechanism to allocate responsibility for limited fact-finding between courts and agencies, to dismiss RCRA citizen …

The Democracy-Forcing Constitution, Neal Devins

Michigan Law Review

During my freshman year in college, I was told not to judge a book by its cover. The book in question - Lolita; the cover suggested something quite salacious. My professor explained that a soldier, who had purchased Lolita to work out some of the kinks of military life, found himself tossing the book out, proclaiming in disgust "Literature!" Well, I cannot claim precisely the same reaction to Cass Sunstein's One Case at a Time (my expectations were lower than the soldier's). Nevertheless, for those expecting a lefty defense of judicial restraint, One Case at a Time is not your …

Television In The Courtroom: Mightier Than The Pen?, Richard P. Matsch

Michigan Law Review

In his Introduction, author Ronald L. Goldfarb explains that his purpose is to address all the arguments advanced against televised trials, cover the points made by proponents of televised trials, and find a sensible solution to what he believes is the fundamental issue: "How can we best blend new media technologies with our traditional and revered commitment to democracy and justice?" (p. xxiv). He ends the book with this prospective paragraph: "I expect that all the courtrooms of the future - state and federal, trial and appellate - will be equipped with cameras. I suggest that all trials should be …

The Democracy-Forcing Constitution, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Municipal Responsibility For Constitutional Torts, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The fundamental principle in the law of municipal liability under § 1983 is that municipalities may be held liable only for their own conduct, not for the conduct of municipal employees. Stated somewhat differently, municipalities may not be held vicariously liable for the conduct of municipal employees but rather can be held liable only when municipal policy is the moving force behind the violation. While this principle is simple to state, it has proven difficult to apply.

Attorney-Client Privilege When The Client Is A Public Official: Litigating The Opening Act Of The Impeachment Drama, Timothy K. Armstrong

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The divided panel decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in /n re Lindsey, 158 F.3d 1263 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 466 (1998), represented a dramatic shift in that court's thinking on the question whether the attorney-client privilege protects what a government official says to his agency's counsel in confidence. Although the court of appeals in at least four previous decisions had held that a government agency client holds the same privilege any other client would under like circumstances to communicate with counsel in private, the Lindsey court took a quite different view.

The Myth Of Choice Of Law: Rethinking Conflicts, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

Michigan Law Review

Choice of law is a mess. That much has become a truism. It is a "dismal swamp," a morass of confusion, a body of doctrine "killed by a realism intended to save it," and now "universally said to be a disaster." One way to demonstrate its tribulations would be to look at the academic dissensus and the hopelessly underdeterminative Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws. Another would be to examine the Supreme Court's abdication of the task of articulating constitutional constraints on state choice-of-law rules. This article will do both. At the outset, though, I want to suggest that one …

The Lexicon Has Become A Fortress: The United States Supreme Court's Use Of Dictionaries, Samuel A. Thumma, Jeffrey L. Kirchmeier

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Indian Water Rights, The Missouri River, And The Administrative Process: What Are The Questions?, John H. Davidson

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Finding The Constitution: An Economic Analysis Of Tradition's Role In Constitutional Interpretation, Adam C. Pritchard, Todd J. Zywicki

Articles

In this Article, Professor Pritchard and Professor Zywicki examine the role of tradition in constitutional interpretation, a topic that has received significant attention in recent years. After outlining the current debate over the use of tradition, the authors discuss the efficiency purposes of constitutionalism--precommitment and the reduction of agency costs--and demonstrate how the use of tradition in constitutional interpretation can serve these purposes. Rejecting both Justice Scalia's majoritarian model, which focuses on legislative sources of tradition, and Justice Souter's common-law model, which focuses on Supreme Court precedent as a source of tradition, the authors propose an alternative model--the "finding model"-- …

Lilly V. Virginia: A Chance To Reconceptualize The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In Lilly v. Virginia, the Supreme Court once again has the opportunity to grapple with the meaning of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendmel).t. The basic facts of Lilly are simple, for they present the ageold problem of accomplice confessions. Three men, Gary Barker and Ben and Mark Lilly, went on a crime spree, during which one of them shot to death a young man they had robbed and kidnaped. Ben Lilly was charged with being the triggerman, and Barker testified to that effect at Ben's trial. Mark did not testify. But Mark had made a statement to the …