Courts Commons^™

Step Aside, Mr. Senator: A Request For Members Of The Senate Judiciary Committee To Give Up Their Mics, Paul E. Vaglicia

Indiana Law Journal

In 1995, a law professor at the University of Chicago Law School dubbed the Supreme Court confirmation hearings “vapid and hollow” and added that they, as implemented, “serve little educative function, except perhaps to reinforce lessons of cynicism that citizens often glean from government.” Ironically, this same law professor, Elena Kagan, later endured the confirmation hearings as a nominee and currently sits as the 112th Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. While she may be one of the few to ever reach a seat on the High Court, she is not alone in her assessment of the Supreme Court’s lackluster …

Building The Federal Judiciary (Literally And Legally): The Monuments Of Chief Justices Taft, Warren And Rehnquist, Judith Resnik

Indiana Law Journal

The “federal courts” took on their now familiar contours over the course of the twentieth century. Three chief justices—William Howard Taft, Earl Warren, and William Rehnquist—played pivotal roles in shaping the institutional, jurisprudential, and physical premises. Taft is well known for promoting a building to house the U.S. Supreme Court and for launching the administrative infrastructure that came to govern the federal courts. Earl Warren’s name has become the shorthand for a jurisprudential shift from state toward federal authority; the Warren Court offered an expansive understanding of the role federal courts could play in enabling access for a host of …

Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose Under Article Iii Standing Doctrine, Heather Elliott

Indiana Law Journal

The Supreme Court’s Article III standing doctrine has plagued liberal groups for nearly forty years. Recently, however, the doctrine has blocked a number of conservative lawsuits opposing gay marriage, the 2010 health care law, and the expansion of federal funding for stem cell research.

What can we learn from these cases? Because contemporary criticisms of standing doctrine have usually come from the left and defenses from the right, it is commonplace to associate arguments for broad standing with left-wing political agendas.

But, as some scholars have shown, a version of narrow standing helped liberals protect New Deal legislation in the …

A Review Of When Legal Orders Collide: The Role Of Courts By Sabino Cassese, Kathleen Claussen

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

The growth and interaction of legal orders beyond the state has precipitated considerable interest among scholars and practitioners. The resulting discussion both in the academy and in the upper reaches of government about the intersection of national legal orders with new areas of non-national law has led to various predictions about possible ramifications of this phenomenon. In recent years, the importance of these transnational questions has grown concurrently with the expansive creation and heightened activity of supranational and global organizations.' Some have gone so far as to herald a new global law, and others have elaborated upon its contours.2 Sabino …

Televising The Supreme Court: Why Legislation Fails, R. Patrick Thornberry

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Innocence And Federal Habeas After Aedpa: Time For The Supreme Court To Act, Joseph L. Hoffmann

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Undermining Congressional Overrides: The Hydra Problem In Statutory Interpretation, Deborah Widiss

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Statutory overrides — that is, amendments to supersede a judicial interpretation of a statute — are the primary mechanism by which Congress signals disagreement with court interpretations; they are essential to protect the separation of powers and the promise of legislative supremacy. But in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, the Supreme Court held that Congress’s override of a judicial interpretation of Title VII did not control the interpretation of identical language in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and further that Congress’s “neglecting” to amend the ADEA when it amended Title VII was a clear signal that Congress intended the …

Fulfilling The Promise Of Payne: Creating Participatory Opportunities For Survivors In Capital Cases, Megan A. Mullett

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Not The Crime But The Cover-Up: A Deterrence-Based Rationale For The Premeditation-Deliberation Formula, Michael J. Zydney Mannheimer

Indiana Law Journal

Beginning with Pennsylvania in 1794, most American jurisdictions have, at one time or another, separated the crime of murder into two degrees based on the presence or absence of premeditation and deliberation. An intentional, premeditated, and deliberate murder is murder of the first degree, while second-degree murder is committed intentionally but without premeditation or deliberation. The distinction was created in order to limit the use of the death penalty, which generally has been imposed only for first-degree murder.

Critics have attacked the premeditation-deliberation formula on two fronts. First, they have charged that the formula is imprecise as a measure of …

The Roberts Court And Freedom Of Speech, Erwin Chemerinsky

Federal Communications Law Journal

This is an edited version of a speech delivered on December 16, 2010 in Washington, D.C., as part of the Federal Communications Bar Association's Distinguished Speaker Series.

This speech was given by Dean Erwin Chemerinsky in December 2010 as part of the FCBA's Distinguished Speaker Series. In the speech, Dean Chemerinsky offers his perspectives on and analysis of the Supreme Court's position on freedom of speech in recent years. He highlights important recent freedom of speech decisions made by the Roberts Court, and gives some projections as to where the court is heading in the years to come, given its …

Procedure's Ambiguity, Mark Moller

Indiana Law Journal

By leaving the meaning of a statute—or procedural rule—undecided, ambiguous appellate decisions create space for lower courts to adopt a blend of conflicting approaches, yielding an average result that trims between competing preferences. While compromising in this way may seem to flout basic norms of good judging, this Article shows that opaque “compromise” opinions have plausible normative appeal, given premises about good interpretation often labeled “pluralist.” Judicial pluralists think courts should decide cases in ways interest groups would, hypothetically, accept. To demonstrate the pluralist appeal of opaque decisions, I develop, in turn, two related claims: First, interest groups, under the …

The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Alexander A. Reinert

Indiana Law Journal

In Conley v. Gibson, the Supreme Court announced its commitment to a liberal pleading regime in federal civil cases, and for decades thereafter was steadfast in resisting ad hoc heightened pleading rules adopted by lower courts. Thus, from 1957 until a few years ago, most litigants could count on surviving a motion to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim so long as their pleading provided some minimal notice to the defendant of the nature of their claim. Enter Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly. Iqbal and Twombly, by many accounts, two-stepped the Court from …

Respect My Authority: Analyzing Claims Of Diminished U.S. Supreme Court Influence Abroad, Aaron B. Aft

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

This paper critiques the argument that the U.S. Supreme Court is losing influence among national and constitutional courts worldwide as a result of its nonparticipation in the emerging judicial globalization. It does so, inter alia, by reviewing two examples of how U.S. authority is cited abroad, and concludes that arguments of diminished influence appear overstated, and that changes in U.S. judicial influence are not likely due to attitudes toward citation of foreign law.

Section 1983 Wrongful Death And Survival Actions In The Seventh Circuit: An Indiana Litigant's Guide To Claims After Russ V. Watts, Michelle R. Gough

Indiana Law Journal

The availability of survival and wrongful death damages in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cases is an area that involves both changing precedent and unaddressed issues within the Seventh Circuit. In both of the aforementioned types of claims, the cases will necessarily involve the tangled application of both state and federal law, and the Seventh Circuit and other federal courts of appeals have struggled to provide a clear, coherent approach to these issues. Indeed, there is strong disagreement among the circuits. Dean Steven H. Steinglass offered the most comprehensive discussion of the nature of both types of claims under § 1983 …

Fundamental Versus Deferential: Appellate Review Of Terminations Of Parental Rights, Karen A. Wyle

Indiana Law Journal

Any attorney who handles or follows cases involving termination of parental rights will have often read, “This court has long had a highly deferential standard of review in cases concerning the termination of parental rights.” This article addresses several questions that arise from that familiar language:

• Does the Indiana Court of Appeals in fact have a tradition or practice of highly deferential review of termination orders?
• Is this deference greater than the court accords to trial court decisions in other family law matters or in non-family civil appeals?
• If so, on what legal analysis is this special deference based?
• Is …

The Family Capital Of Capital Families: Investigating Empathic Connections Between Jurors And Defendants' Families In Death Penalty Cases, Jody L. Madeira

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Frames Of Injustice: The Bias We Overlook, Adam Benforado

Indiana Law Journal

The Cultural Cognition Project (CCP) at Yale Law School and the Project on Law and Mind Sciences (PLMS) at Harvard Law School draw on similar research and share a similar goal of uncovering the dynamics that shape risk perceptions, policy beliefs, and attributions underlying our laws and legal theories. Nonetheless, the projects have failed to engage one another in a substantial way. This Article attempts to bridge that gap by demonstrating how the approach taken by PLMS scholars can crucially enrich CCP scholarship. As a demonstration, this Article engages the case of Scott v. Harris, 550 US. 372 (2007), the …

Unfettered Discretion: Criminal Orders Of Protection And Their Impact On Parent Defendants, David Michael Jaros

Indiana Law Journal

The last two decades have witnessed an astonishing increase in the use of the criminal justice system to police neglectful parents. Recasting traditional allegations of neglect as criminal charges of endangering the welfare of a child, prosecutors and the police have involved criminal courts in the regulation of aspects of the parent-child relationship that were once the sole province of family courts. This Article explores the legal implications of vesting judges in these cases with the unfettered discretion to issue protective orders that criminalize contact between a parent and her child.I argue that procedures for issuing protective orders that were …

"Why Rebottle The Genie?": Capitalizing On Closure In Death Penalty Proceedings, Jody L. Madeira

Indiana Law Journal

Closure, though a term with great rhetorical force in the capital punishment context, has to date evaded systematic analysis, instead becoming embroiled in ideological controversy. For victims who have rubbed the rights lamp for years, inclusion in capital proceedings and accompanying closure opportunities are perceived as a force with the potential to grant wishes of peace and finality. Scholars, however, argue for rebottling the closure genie lest closure itself prove false or its pursuit violate a defendant's constitutional rights. In order to effectively appraise the relationship of closure to criminal jurisprudence, however, and thus to decide whether and to what …

Civil Judicial Subsidy, Brendan S. Maher

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Facial Challenges And Separation Of Powers, Luke Meier

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Plea Jury, Laura I. Appleman

Indiana Law Journal

This Article argues that it is time to reform the much-criticized plea-bargaining process by restoring the Sixth Amendment jury trial right back to criminal adjudication. My proposal would incorporate the local community into the guilty-plea procedure through the use of a plea jury, thus solving a multitude of problems within the criminal justice system. In a plea jury, a lay panel of citizens would listen to the defendant's allocution and determine the acceptability of the plea and sentence, reinvigorating the community's right to determine punishment for offenders. My goal is to return the Sixth Amendment community-jury right to its proper …

When Is An Alternative Forum Available? Rethinking The Forum Non Conveniens Analysis, Joel H. Samuels

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tort Damages And The New Science Of Happiness, Rick Swedloff, Peter H. Huang

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Error Correction, Chad M. Oldfather

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Liberty Lost: The Moral Case For Marijuana Law Reform, Eric Blumenson, Eva Nilsen

Indiana Law Journal

Marijuana policy analyses typically focus on the relative costs and benefits of present policy and its feasible alternatives. This Essay addresses a prior, threshold issue: whether marijuana criminal laws abridge fundamental individual rights, and if so, whether there are grounds that justify doing so. Over 700, 000 people are arrested annually for simple marijuana possession, a small but significant proportion of the 100 million Americans who have committed the same crime. In this Essay, we present a civil libertarian case for repealing marijuana possession laws. We put forward two arguments corresponding to the two distinct liberty concerns implicated by laws …

Coercing Voluntariness, Wadie E. Said

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Crossroads And Signposts: The Ada Amendments Act Of 2008, Jeannette Cox

Indiana Law Journal

Although the apparent purpose of the 2008 amendments to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is solely to broaden the ADA 's protected class, the manner in which the amendments achieve this purpose erodes the statute's explicit textual support for understanding persons with disabilities as a politically subordinated minority. The amendments also strengthen the statutory link between the biological severity of a person's disability and that person's right to sue for ADA accommodations. Accordingly, for some courts, the amendments will reinforce the perception that the ADA differs from traditional civil rights law.

Federal courts' understanding of the ADA 's relationship …

Clinton, Ginsburg, And Centrist Federalism, Russell A. Miller

Indiana Law Journal

This Article examines Justice Ginsburg's overlooked federalism jurisprudence and concludes that it almost perfectly complements President Bill Clinton's New Democratic centrism, especially his pro-state federalism agenda. The Article concludes that their nuanced, "centrist" approach to federalism has two characteristics. First,t hey value the states 'governing autonomy and show respect for the state agents that realize that autonomy. Second, they credit the states as intersubjective actors engaged in the pursuit of their interests, albeit in political processes usually carried out at the federal level.

Judicial Disqualification: An Analysis Of Federal Law, Second Edition, Charles G. Geyh

Books & Book Chapters by Maurer Faculty

Judicial Disqualification: An Analysis of Federal Law (second edition) outlines the statutory framework of federal judicial disqualification law under the statutes, 28 U.S.C. §§ 455, 144, 47, and 2106. The monograph substantially revises and expands on the first edition, and analyzes the case law, with a focus both on substantive disqualification standards and procedural requirements. It features a revised organizational structure and includes new material, as well as updated cases.