Courts Commons^™

The Honorable Robert R. Merhige, Jr.: A Judge Ahead Of His Time, Wayne A. Logan

University of Richmond Law Review

When one thinks about it, it is really quite incredible: a Brooklyn-born son of Lebanese and Irish immigrants with a distinct New York accent, standing well under six feet tall, attends a small North Carolina college on a basketball scholarship; serves with distinction in a bombing squadron in World War II; graduates from the University of Richmond School of Law (paying his way by serving as a night librarian); excels at the practice of law in a city (Richmond) not renowned for its receptivity to Yankees; wins election as president of the city’s Bar; and upon being appointed to the …

The Conscience Of Virginia: Judge Robert R. Merhige, Jr., And The Politics Of School Desegregation, Robert A. Pratt

University of Richmond Law Review

The United States Supreme Court’s 1954 landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education declared that segregation in public education violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. For the millions of African Americans who had endured decades of separate and unequal schooling, this decision was a resounding reaffirmation of the nation’s commitment to equal justice under the law. But those who expected segregated schools to end overnight were in for a rude awakening. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (“NAACP”), which had led the legal assault against segregation since its founding in 1909, was encouraged …

Judge Merhige's Environmental Decisions: Expert Handling Of Groundbreaking Environmental Rulings And Complex Federal Jurisdictional Questions, Jim Vines

University of Richmond Law Review

It is a special privilege for me to contribute to this edition of the University of Richmond Law Review honoring Judge Robert R. Merhige, Jr. Here, I seek to highlight his contributions to United States environmental law. In 1988 and 1989, I was one of two recent law school graduates who clerked for Judge Merhige (“please call me by my first name; it’s ‘Judge’”). The Judge was a larger than life figure. As a federal trial judge, historically important and intellectually challenging cases seemed to find their way into his court in a volume not matched in many other federal …

Delegation Enforcement By State Attorneys General, Jonathan David Shaub

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

States Suing The Federal Government: Protecting Liberty Or Playing Politics?, Elbert Lin

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Non-Originalist Separation Of Powers, Eric J. Segall

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The President, Prosecutorial Discretion, Obstruction Of Justice, And Congress, Henry L. Chambers Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appointing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender And Queer Judges In The Trump Administration, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

President Donald Trump incessantly brags that American citizens selected him to “Make the Judiciary Great Again” and constantly reminds the public that the huge number of federal jurists whom Trump has appointed will be deciding cases decades after his tenure is over. Trump has rapidly submitted many circuit and district court candidates, but not one of his 123 nominees has been openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer (LGBTQ). The White House has also instituted endeavors, specifically regarding transgender people, which seem discriminatory. Indeed, a third of the judicial nominees whom the President has appointed have compiled anti-LGBTQ records. Because …

Severability, Separation Of Powers, And Agency Design, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Kristin Hickman pursues a “modest” goal in Symbolism and Separation of Powers in Agency Design: “to raise a few reservations regarding judicial refashioning of agency design via [a] severance remedy for separation of powers violations.” This understated approach commands attention to Hickman’s analysis. In this contribution to a Notre Dame symposium on “Administrative Lawmaking in the Twenty-First Century,” Hickman clearly identifies and carefully analyzes problems arising out of what might otherwise have passed as unremarkable applications of existing severability doctrine. With an eye toward big-picture legitimacy of courts and agencies, and with attention toward doctrinal and statutory detail, Hickman …

Curing The Federal Court Vacancy Crisis, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The federal judiciary has experienced a vacancy crisis, which has intensified over President Donald Trump's tenure when judicial openings significantly increased from the 105 vacancies at his inauguration. Despite these concerns, analysts hail court selection as Trump's paramount success. This Article canvasses the rise and expansion of the crisis and scrutinizes the practices which Trump and the I 15th Senate instituted, as Republican concentration on quickly appointing many conservative appeals court judges resulted in departures from longstanding precedents and undermined the presidential discharge of constitutional responsibilities to nominate and confirm impressive jurists as well as senatorial duties to advise and …

Removing Race From The Jury Deliberation Room: The Shortcomings Of Pena-Rodriguez V. Colorado And How To Address Them, Lauren Crump

Law Student Publications

This comment explores ways in which racial bias undermines the American jury system and argues that simply having a racial bias exception to the no-impeachment rule does not go far enough to guard against racially motivated jury verdicts. In order to guarantee the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury, defendants must always be able to question potential jurors about racial bias, and universal court policies need to be adopted across the country that allow for a consistent approach for investigating claims of racial bias in jury deliberations. Part I of this comment examines the history of American juries and …

Enforcing Statutory Maximums: How Federal Supervised Release Violates The Sixth Amendment Rights Defined In Apprendi V. New Jersey, Danny Zemel

Law Student Publications

The Sixth Amendment commands that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Trial by a jury of one’s peers is a fundamental American legal right, existing in the earliest colonies before being codified in both Article III of the Constitution and the Sixth Amendment. The jury trial right derives from “the mass of the people,” ensuring that “no man can be condemned of life, or limb, or property, or reputation, without the concurrence of the …

Rapid Dna Testing And Virginia's Rape Kit Backlog: A Double-Edged Sword Masquerading As A Miracle, Or The Future Of Forensic Analysis?, Emma C. Greger

Law Student Publications

While Rapid DNA technology has the potential to revolutionize every aspect of the criminal justice system, from arrest to the postconviction appeals process, there has been particular excitement centered around its potential to reduce the rape kit backlog.

Removing Race From The Jury Deliberation Room: The Shortcomings Of Pena-Rodriguez V. Colorado And How To Address Them, Lauren Crump

University of Richmond Law Review

This comment explores ways in which racial bias undermines

the American jury system and argues that simply having a racial

bias exception to the no-impeachment rule does not go far enough

to guard against racially motivated jury verdicts. In order to

guarantee the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury, defendants

must always be able to question potential jurors about

racial bias, and universal court policies need to be adopted across

the country that allow for a consistent approach for investigating

claims of racial bias in jury deliberations. Part I of this comment

examines the history of American juries and …

President Donald Trump And Federal Bench Diversity, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

President Donald Trump constantly reminds United States citizens about the myriad circuit and district court appointments that his White House is making to the federal judiciary. Last September, Trump proposed the seventh “wave,” which included three people of color among sixteen judicial nominees. This wave permitted the administration to triple the number of ethnic minority picks whom it had selected, which means that the Executive Branch has proffered ten persons of color in appeals court and district court submissions, yet none is a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) individual. Nevertheless, a problematic pattern, which implicates a stunning lack of …

Improper Delegation Of Judicial Authority In Child Custody Cases: Finally Overturned, Dale Margolin Cecka

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Status Courts, Erin R. Collins

Law Faculty Publications

This Article identifies and analyzes a new type of specialized "problemsolving" court: status courts. Status courts are criminal or quasicriminal courts dedicated to defendants who are members of particular status groups, such as veterans or girls. They differ from other problemsolving courts, such as drug or domestic violence courts, in that nothing about the status court offender or the offense he or she committed presents a systemic "problem" to be "solved." In fact, status courts aim to honor the offender's experience and strengthen the offender's association with the characteristic used to sort him or her into court.

This Article positions …

Filling The Texas Federal Court Vacancies, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Texas confronts many federal appellate and district court openings, but the situation has reached crisis proportions. The state addresses two protracted U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacancies, which have lacked nominees for multiple years, and eleven open trial court seats, all but one classified as "judicial emergencies." This conundrum persists, although the Senate confirmed three jurists for Texas district vacancies in both 2014 and 2015 and President Barack Obama submitted well qualified, mainstream nominees on five empty posts in March 2016. Texas Republican Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz also failed to expeditiously provide those designees' "blue …

Confirming Judge Restrepo To The Third Circuit, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

From the moment that the Grand Old Party (GOP) won the Senate in November 2014, Republicans have directly and incessantly vowed to establish “regular order” in the upper chamber again. Lawmakers employed this phrase to depict the purported restoration of strictures that prevailed until Democrats subverted them. In January 2015, when the 114th Congress began, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the Majority Leader, proclaimed, “[w]e need to return to regular order,” while the legislator has dutifully recited that mantra ever since. Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, espoused analogous concepts. Illustrative was his January 2015 pledge …

Filling The Seventh Circuit Vacancies, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

In January 2016, President Barack Obama nominated Donald Schott and Myra Selby for empty judicial positions on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Schott is a very talented practitioner, who has efficaciously served as a well-respected partner of a major law firm for greater than thirty years. For instance, Schott has professionally worked on numerous complicated federal suits and a plethora of complex actions, many of which efforts concluded with alternative dispute resolution. Selby is concomitantly an exceptional lawyer, who has compiled a distinguished record in the public and private sectors. For example, the compelling prospect …

Nominate Judge Koh To The Ninth Circuit Again, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

During February 2016, President Barack Obama nominated United States District Judge Lucy Haeran Koh to a “judicial emergency” vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. She has capably served over multiple years in the Northern District of California competently deciding numerous high-profile lawsuits, specifically regarding intellectual property. Accordingly, the President’s efforts to confirm her were unsurprising. However, 2016 was a presidential election year when judicial nominations traditionally slow and ultimately halt. This difficulty was exacerbated when Republicans consistently refused to implement any confirmation process for United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia …

Confirming Supreme Court Justices In A Presidential Election Year, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Justice Antonin Scalia’s death prompted United States Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to argue that the President to be inaugurated on January 20, 2017—not Barack Obama—must fill the empty Scalia post. Obama in turn expressed sympathy for the Justice’s family and friends, lauded his consummate public service, and pledged to nominate a replacement “in due time,” contending that eleven months remained in his administration for confirming a worthy successor. Obama admonished that the President had a constitutional duty to nominate a superlative aspirant to the vacancy, which must not have persisted for …

Recalibrating Judicial Renominations In The Trump Administration, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Now that President Donald Trump has commenced the fifth month of his administration, federal courts experience 121 circuit and district court vacancies. These statistics indicate that Mr. Trump has a valuable opportunity to approve more judges than any new President. The protracted open judgeships detrimentally affect people and businesses engaged in federal court litigation, because they restrict the expeditious, inexpensive and equitable disposition of cases. Nevertheless, the White House has been treating crucial issues that mandate careful attention-specifically establishing a government, confirming a Supreme Court Justice, and keeping numerous campaign promises. How, accordingly, can President Trump fulfill these critical duties …

Improper Delegation Of Judicial Authority In Child Custody Cases: Finally Overturned, Dale Margolin Cecka

Law Faculty Publications

"The appellate courts of this Commonwealth are not unlit rooms where attorneys may wander blindly about, hoping to stumble upon a reversible error."

These words of Judge Humphreys, denying a 2016 child custody appeal, are cogent. Yet four months later, in another appeal, Judge Humphreys joined a unanimous decision overturning a common provision in a custody order. In Bonhotel v. Watts, the Court of Appeals of Virginia held that judges cannot delegate judicial decision making power in child custody cases to outside professionals. This sounds obvious, but such delegation is actually ordered all the time. In final orders, Virginia's trial …

Issue 1: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter

University of Richmond Law Review

This comment examines actual innocence in Virginia: the progress it has made, the problems it still faces, and the possibilities for reform. Part I addresses past reform to the system, spurred by the shocking tales of Thomas Haynesworth and others. Part II identifies three of the most prevalent systemic challenges marring Virginia's justice system: (1) flawed scientific evidence; (2) the premature destruction of evidence; and (3) false confessions and guilty pleas. Part III suggests ways in which Virginia can, and should, address these challenges to ensure that the justice system is actually serving justice.

Grow Up Virginia: Time To Change Our Filial Responsibility Law, Sylvia Macon

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Thoughts Raised By Magna Carta: The Popular Re-Election Of Judges, William Hamilton Bryson

Law Faculty Publications

This essay, first presented at the Magna Carta anniversary symposium of the Baronial Order of Magna Charta on April 16, 2015, at The Cosmos Club, in Washington, D.C., takes as its inspiration the spirit of the rule of law, as laid down in the Magna Carta. Specifically, the author argues that the popular election and reelection of judges undermines the rule of law, and democracy in general, by exposing judges to the manipulations of financial corruption, political intimidation, and the often irrational shifts in popular opinion. To correct this problem, the author calls for amendment of the thirty-nine state constitutions …

The Court After Scalia, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

In this editorial, Professor Walsh surveys the 2015-2016 U.S. Supreme Court term, with particular attention to the effects the late Justice Antonin Scalia's absence had on the Court's decisions.

Forensic Science Developments And Judicial Decision-Making In The Era Of Innocence: The Influence Of Legal Process Theory And Its Implications, Sarah Lucy Cooper

Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest

This article confirms the existence of these legal process-centric themes and considers some potential implications of these approaches. Part I briefly sets out key tenets of the legal process vision and provides some back- ground to the American Innocence Movement. Using examples from relevant case law, Part II examines the courts’ approaches thematically, demonstrating how the courts exhibit loyalty to the legal process vision. It also considers the implications of this loyalty, including that it can result in both the extraction of science from its social context and an awkward approach towards discerning between credible and incredible forensic science evidence …