Courts Commons^™

Eliminating Fear Through Recreating Community In Rwanda: The Role Of The Gacaca Courts, Christine M. Venter

Journal Articles

This article describes the institution of the Gacaca Courts in Rwanda, which were set up to try people charged with participating in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The author examines the options available to the Rwandan government in seeding to prosecute people charged with crimes related to the genocide, and concludes that, while flawed, the gacaca courts were the best option available. The article explores how the courts were developed based on the participatory and restorative ideals of African indigenous legal systems, and how these courts provide an opportunity for some form of "truth telling" in post-genocide Rwanda.

What's On Your Mind? Imputing Motive In A Title Vii Case, An Analysis Of Bci Coca-Cola Bottling Co. V. Eeoc, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article examines the case E.E.O.C. v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, which was scheduled for argument before the Supreme Court, but was dismissed before that argument occurred.

The Origins Of Article Iii "Arising Under" Jurisdiction, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

Article III of the Constitution provides that the judicial Power of the United States extends to all cases arising under the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States. What the phrase arising under imports in Article III has long confounded courts and scholars. This Article examines the historical origins of Article III arising under jurisdiction. First, it describes English legal principles that governed the jurisdiction of courts of general and limited jurisdiction--principles that animated early American jurisprudence regarding the scope of arising under jurisdiction. Second, it explains how participants in the framing and ratification of the Constitution understood arising …

Federalism Doctrines And Abortion Cases: A Response To Professor Fallon, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

This Essay is a response to Professor Richard Fallon's article, If Roe Were Overruled: Abortion and the Constitution in a Post-Roe World. In that article, Professor Fallon argues that if the Supreme Court were to overrule Roe v. Wade, courts might well remain in the abortion-umpiring business. This Essay proposes a refinement on that analysis. It argues that in a post-Roe world courts would not necessarily subject questions involving abortion to the same kind of constitutional analysis in which the Court has engaged in Roe and its progeny, that is, balancing a state's interest in protecting life against a pregnant …

Brief For Professors Of Electronic Privacy Law And Internet Law As Amici Curiae Supporting The Appellee And Urging Affirmance, Patricia L. Bellia, Susan Freiwald

Court Briefs

No. 06-4092
Steven Warshak v. United States of America

On appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati

From the Summary of Argument

Electronic mail (“e-mail’) has become an essential medium of communication and assumed a vital role in our lives. The contents of our e-mail accounts reveal extensive and detailed information about our interests, our views, and our actions. Yet, the Government in this case claims the right to obtain the entirety of our personal e-mail accounts from our service providers, without first establishing probable cause or providing us notice, so long …

Brief Amici Curiae Of Christian Legal Society, National Association Of Evangelicals, Pro-Life Legal Defense Fund, Alliance Defense Fund And Concerned Women For America In Support Of Petitioner, Gregory S. Baylor, Steven H. Aden, Richard W. Garnett, Michael Stokes Paulsen

Court Briefs

No. 05-1382
Alberto R. Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.

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

From the Summary of Argument

For as long as the American public has known about partial-birth abortion, we have—by comfortable and consistent margins—agreed with former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan that this gruesome practice is “infanticide, and one would be too many.” Meet the Press (NBC television broadcast, Mar. 2, 1997). Whether we oppose elective abortions as a matter of moral principle or regard a woman’s legal access to abortion as a component of …

The Supervisory Power Of The Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett

Journal Articles

Relying on something it calls supervisory power or supervisory authority, the Supreme Court regularly prescribes rules of procedure and evidence for inferior courts. Both scholars and the Court have treated the Court's exercises of this authority as unexceptional exercises of the inherent authority that Article III grants every federal court to regulate procedure in the course of adjudication. Article III's grant of inherent authority, however, is conventionally understood as permitting a federal court to regulate its own proceedings. When the Supreme Court exercises supervisory power, it regulates the proceedings of other federal courts. More than a reference to every court's …

The Federal Constitutional Court: Guardian Of German Democracy, Donald P. Kommers

Journal Articles

Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court rivals the Supreme Court of the United States in protecting political democracy. Its jurisprudence of democracy has shaped the course and character of German politics while upholding the rule of law and defending the constitutionally prescribed “free democratic basic order.” In furtherance of these objectives, the Constitutional Court has invalidated regulations limiting the rights of minor parties and constitutionalizing measures designed to stabilize Germany’s system of parliamentary government. These purposes have been served by constitutional decisions on voting rights, public funding of election campaigns, dissolution of Parliament, and proportional representation, including the limiting 5 percent clause. …

The Judicial Experiment With Privatizing Religion, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

1984 was the high water mark of the U.S. Supreme Court's campaign to privatize religion - to strip public life bare of the sacred. It may also prove to be the mid-point: the "naked public square" was mandated by the Supreme Court in 1962, and there is good reason to think that now, in 2007, the Court might finally put an end to their misbegotten experiment.

"Privatization" of religion is tantamount to "secularism." Neither term denotes atheism, the claim that there is no God and that religion is, basically, an illusion. Privatization and secularism refer not to the denial of …

State Courts And The Interpretation Of Federal Statutes, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

Scholars have long debated the separation of powers question of what judicial power federal courts have under Article III of the Constitution in the enterprise of interpreting federal statutes. Specifically, scholars have debated whether, in light of Founding-era English and state court judicial practice, the judicial power of the United States should be understood as a power to interpret statutes dynamically or as faithful agents of Congress. This Article argues that the question of how courts should interpret federal statutes is one not only of separation of powers but of federalism as well. State courts have a vital and often …

Statutory Stare Decisis In The Courts Of Appeals, Amy Coney Barrett

Journal Articles

The Supreme Court has long given its cases interpreting statutes special protection from overruling. Two rationales exist for this practice. One line of thought interprets congressional silence following the Supreme Court's interpretation of a statute as approval of that interpretation. According to this way of thinking, a refusal to overrule statutory precedent is a refusal to veer from an interpretation that Congress has effectively approved. Another line of thought emphasizes that statutory interpretation inevitably involves policymaking, and that policymaking is an aspect of legislative, rather than judicial, power. According to this second way of thinking, the Supreme Court should refuse …

State Courts And The Making Of Federal Common Law, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

The authority of federal courts to make federal common law has been a controversial question for courts and scholars. Several scholars have propounded theories addressing primarily whether and when federal courts are justified in making federal common law. It is a little-noticed phenomenon that state courts, too, make federal common law. This Article brings to light the fact that state courts routinely make federal common law in as real a sense as federal courts make it. It further explains that theories that focus on whether the making of federal common law by federal courts is justified are inadequate to explain …

Time Is Money--But Is It Compensable Work? An Analysis Of Ibp, Inc. V. Alvarez, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, 546 U.S. 21 (2005). The issues raised in that case were: Is the time employees spend walking and waiting in line during the process of donning and doffing required safety equipment considered compensable work such that employers must pay them for that time?

Brief Amicus Curiae Of Professors David L. Callies, James T. Ely, Paula A. Franzese, Nicole Stelle Garnett, James E. Krier, Daniel R. Mandelker, John Copeland Nagle, John Nolon, J.B. Ruhl, Shelley Ross Saxer, A. Dan Tarlock, Laura Underkuffler, And Edward F. Ziegler In Support Of Petitioners, David L. Callies, Nicole Stelle Garnett, John Copeland Nagle

Court Briefs

No. 04-108
Susette Kelo v. City of New London

On Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court of Connecticut

From the Summary of Argument

The Connecticut Supreme Court's decision was in keeping with Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984), which provides that legislative assertions of public use should be subjected to rational basis review. The application of such broadly deferential review in public use cases is inappropriate. Application of rational basis review to the exercise of eminent domain in cases such as this effectively eviscerates the Fifth Amendment's public use limitation. Moreover, lower courts' responses to …

Brief On Rehearing En Banc For Senator Patrick J. Leahy As Amicus Curiae Supporting The United States And Urging Reversal, Patricia L. Bellia, Peter P. Swire

Court Briefs

No. 03-1383
United States v. Bradford C. Councilman

On appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

From the Summary of Argument

Congress passed ECPA to update the existing surveillance law framework for new technologies. Recognizing the threat to privacy posed by the continuous, systematic acquisition of electronic communications during their transmission, Congress extended existing prohibitions against the unauthorized “intercept[ion]” of wire and oral communications, enacted in Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, Pub. L. No. 90-351, tit. III, §§ 801–804, 82 Stat. 211 (codified as amended at 18 …

Article Iii And The Cause Of Action, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

This Article undertakes a systematic exploration of the concept of the "cause of action" as it is used by courts and scholars in making arguments about the scope of the federal judicial power. The concept of the cause of action figures prominently in debates about such fundamental questions as what kinds of cases Congress may empower federal courts to adjudicate (jurisdiction), who may initiate a case in federal court (standing), and when a federal court may afford a plaintiff a private remedy for the violation of a federal regulatory scheme (implied rights of action). Federal courts have answered these questions, …

Does Title Ix Protect Academic Whistle Blowers? An Analysis Of Jackson V. Birminghan Board Of Education, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 544 U.S. 167 (2005). The author expected the Court to decide whether Title IX's ban on discrimination allows a private individual to sue for retaliation when a recipient of federal funds engages in adverse action against that individual because of his complaints that the recipient is violating Title IX?

What Is An Employer's Liability For Constructive Discharge Under Title Vii? An Analysis Of Pennsylvania State Police V. Suders, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004). In this case involving Title VII, the author expected the Court to analyze whether whether a constructive discharge caused by supervisory harassment is a tangible employment action for purposes of imposing striet liability.

The United States Supreme Court Rulings On Detention Of "Enemy Combatants" - Partial Vindication Of The Rule Of Law, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

In three rulings on prolonged military detention of so-called "unlawful enemy combatants" in the "war" against terrorism, the United States Supreme Court in June 2004 shielded the rule of law from some of the more extreme excesses of the Bush Administration. However, the Court also yielded some ground and left open a number of troublesome questions.

What Is The Time Limit For Filing A Lawsuit? It Depends On What Your Definition Of "Arising Under" Is! An Analysis Of Jones V. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Jones et. al. v. R.R. Donnelly & Sons Co., 541 U.S. 369 (2004). The author predicted that the case would require the court to determine the appropriate statute of limitations to apply in a class action race-discrimination lawsuit filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

Federal Courts, International Tribunals, And The Continuum Of Deference: A Postscript On Lawrence V. Texas, Roger P. Alford

Journal Articles

Last year, in the pages of this journal, I published an article addressing the role of international tribunal decisions in federal courts.1 In that article, it was suggested that federal courts should confer varying degrees of deference to international tribunal decisions depending on the circumstances presented. Such degrees of deference were plotted along a "continuum of deference." See: Federal Courts, International Tribunals, and the Continuum of Deference

The purpose of this brief Postscript is to reconsider the "no deference" model in light of the Supreme Court's decisions in Bowers and Lawrence. The Postscript elucidates why Lawrence relied on an international …

Introductory Note To U.S. Court Of Appeals For The District Of Columbia Circuit: Nemariam, Et. Al. V. Ethiopia, Roger P. Alford

Journal Articles

Nemariam v. Ethiopia is one of the most important United States decisions to date addressing whether an international tribunal may be an adequate forum for purposes of dismissing pending litigation based on forum non conveniens. The decision essentially suggests that diplomatic espousal claims before international tribunals can never afford claimants an adequate forum justifying dismissal based on forum non conveniens absent some guarantee of individual relief for meritorious claims.

Musical Courts: Plaintiff Picks A Court But Can Defendant Trump The Choice? An Analysis Of Breuer V. Jim's Concrete Of Brevard, Inc., Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Brewer v. Jim's Concrete of Brevard, 538 U.S. 691 (2003). The author expected the Court to address the issue of whether the language of the Fair Labor Standards Act providing that "an action . . . may be maintained in any federal or state court" constitutes an express provision prohibiting removal to federal court when the plaintiff has chosen to maintain its lawsuit in state court.

Mixed Up About Mixed Motive: What Will Trigger A "Mixed Motive" Analysis In Title Vii Cases? An Analysis Of Desert Palace, Inc. V. Costa, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90, 2003. The author expected the Court to clarify and define the circumstances in which it is appropriate to use the "mixed-motive model" to prove a violation of Title VII under the disparate treatment theory.

Stare Decisis And Due Process, Amy Coney Barrett

Journal Articles

In this Article, I argue that the preclusive effect of precedent raises due-process concerns, and, on occasion, slides into unconstitutionality. The Due Process Clause requires that a court give a person notice and an opportunity for a hearing before depriving her of life, liberty or property. Because of this requirement, courts have held in the context of issue preclusion that as a general rule, judicial determinations can bind only parties. The preclusion literature asserts that this parties only requirement does not apply to stare decisis because stare decisis, in contrast to issue preclusion, is a flexible doctrine. Yet stare decisis …

Executive Power In Youngstown's Shadows, Patricia L. Bellia

Journal Articles

Fifty years after it was handed down, the Supreme Court's decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer is among the most important of the Court's separation of powers cases. This Article explores two quite different legacies of the Youngstown case. First, Youngstown has a symbolic or rhetorical power, in that it stands as an example of a court invalidating the actions of a coordinate branch of government in a politically delicate context. When a court wields this weapon, it can take some cover in Youngstown's shadows, and the possibility of a court exercising this power disciplines the executive …

Reconciling The Nlra And Irca: Can An Undocumented Worker Receive Back Pay? An Analysis Of Hoffman Plastic Compound, Inc. V. Nlrb, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Hoffman Plastic Compound, Inc., v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002). The author expected the Court to address in this case the apparent conflict between the National Labor Relations Act's goal of the prevention of unfair labor practices and the Immigration Reform and Control Act's denial of employment to undocumented aliens. This issue arose because of an award of back pay to an undocumented worker who was fired because of his union organizing activities.

Activism As Restraint: Lessons From Criminal Procedure, Stephen F. Smith

Journal Articles

In this Article, I advance a limited defense of judicial activism by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts in constitutional criminal procedure. My basic claim is that even if the so-called "Counterrevolution" in criminal procedure is viewed as activist -- as I think much of it must be -- it nevertheless was normatively defensible as a necessary condition, in a “second-best” world, of reaching an equilibrium closer to the judicial restraint model than would be possible if activism were only a one-way ratchet. Though my thesis supplies a justification for the Burger and Rehnquist Court's basic approach to legal change, it …

Mr. Dooley And Mr. Gallup: Public Opinion And Constitutional Change In The 1930s, Barry Cushman

Journal Articles

Scholars interested in the development of political and constitutional culture during the 1930s sometimes draw inferences about popular preferences on various issues of social and economic policy from the results of presidential and congressional elections. A review of contemporary public opinion polls taken by George Gallup for the American Institute of Public Opinion and by Elmo Roper for the Fortune Magazine survey offers a more granular understanding of popular views on the public policy issues of the day. This article canvasses all of the public opinion polls taken by Gallup and Roper between 1935, when they began publishing their results, …

The Rehnquist Court And Criminal Procedure, Stephen F. Smith

Journal Articles

Much of recent discussions of conservative judicial activism has concerned the revival of federalism-based limits on Congress during the Rehnquist Court. The allure of federalism as a topic for discussion is understandable, yet I argue that constitutional criminal procedure provides a better context within which to test the Rehnquist Court's commitment to judicial restraint. In this Essay, I examine the topic at hand against the background of the many important developments that have taken place in criminal procedure on Rehnquist's watch. The results of this examination are surprising because they suggest that activism is not necessarily the antithesis of restraint. …