Courts Commons^™

Induced Litigation, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

If "justice delayed" is "justice denied,"justice is often denied in American courts. Delay in the courts is a "ceaseless and unremitting problem of modem civil justice" that "has an irreparable effect on both plaintiffs and defendants." To combat this seemingly intractable problem, judges and court administrators routinely clamor for additional judicial resources to enable them to manage their dockets more "effectively and efficiently." By building new courthouses and adding new judgeships, a court should be able to manage its caseload more efficiently. Trial judges should be able to hold motion hearings, host settlement conferences, and conduct trials in a timely …

Order In The Court: Judicial Stability And Democratic Success In Haiti, Ben J. Scott

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Haiti faces many challenges in its attempt to build a stable, liberal democracy. Haitians have endured a legacy of chaotic and heavy-handed rule in recent decades, and the success of democracy in Haiti is both hoped for and doubted by Haitians and the international community. One reason for the doubts has been the failure of the Haitian government successfully to implement free and fair elections. Citizens and candidates are often hesitant even to participate in elections. Though both were tragic, neither the failed legislative and presidential elections of 2000, nor the subsequent coup d'etat in 2004 that resulted in the …

Induced Litigation, Chris Guthrie, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

If "justice delayed" is "justice denied,"justice is often denied in American courts. Delay in the courts is a "ceaseless and unremitting problem of modem civil justice" that "has an irreparable effect on both plaintiffs and defendants." To combat this seemingly intractable problem, judges and court administrators routinely clamor for additional judicial resources to enable them to manage their dockets more "effectively and efficiently." By building new courthouses and adding new judgeships, a court should be able to manage its caseload more efficiently. Trial judges should be able to hold motion hearings, host settlement conferences, and conduct trials in a timely …

Federal Court Authority To Regulate Lawyers: A Practice In Search Of A Theory Of A, Fred C. Zacharias, Bruce A. Green

Vanderbilt Law Review

Federal courts regulate lawyers, including federal prosecutors, by enforcing various constitutional, statutory, and other legal constraints. Federal courts also adopt and enforce their own disciplinary rules pursuant to rule-making authority delegated by Congress. To what extent, however, do federal courts have independent power, in the absence of an explicit grant of authority, to regulate private lawyers and federal prosecutors? Although lower federal courts have long exercised power both to define and to sanction professional misconduct, the United States Supreme Court has never clarified the source and scope of this authority.

This issue is important for two reasons. First, most federal …

The Federal Court System: A Principal-Agent Perspective, Tracey E. George, Albert H. Yoon

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Professor Merrill ably demonstrates that Supreme Court decisions should be examined as the product of an inherently political institution. Observers who assert that Justices are best understood as prophets of the law are practicing an intellectual sleight of hand that allows them to ignore the non­ doctrinal factors that affect judicial behavior. Such an effort is understandable. The Court is a much more complicated subject if its rulings reflect nonlegal factors as well as legal ones. The desire, however, to ignore the true character of the Court produces accounts of its behavior that are inadequate, incorrect, or wholly without content. …

Contractual Choice Of Law And The Prudential Foundations Of Appellate Review, David Frisch

Vanderbilt Law Review

Within the past decade, professional organizations interested in making the law better suited to commercial transactions have begun to advocate the proposition that contracting parties should have almost unlimited power to choose the law to govern their relationship. The new choice-of-law framework resulting from these reform efforts will provide parties with an expanded menu of legal regimes from which to choose when drafting their contract and, in turn, will lead to a more frequent use of choice-of-law clauses. Indeed, some have even suggested that omitting such a clause may soon become malpractice for the commercial lawyer. Given both the trend …

Advancing U.S. Interests With The International Criminal Court, David J. Scheffer

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

It is a great pleasure to be here in this beautiful lecture hall at Vanderbilt University Law School and to have the opportunity to speak to you this afternoon about the International Criminal Court (ICC). In recent months, one newspaper or magazine article after another, in examining the foreign policy of the current administration and the gulf (which seems to be so pronounced now) between the United States and even its closest allies throughout the rest of the world, has listed a basic set of treaties as being partly explanatory of that gulf. The Kyoto Protocol, for example, is always …

Regulating Federal Prosecutors' Ethics, Bruce A. Green, Fred C. Zacharias

Vanderbilt Law Review

To what extent should federal prosecutors be regulated by states, by federal courts, or by the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ) as a matter of self-regulation? This Article concludes that, subject to congressional oversight, federal courts should have the ultimate authority to regulate federal prosecutors. However, it also acknowledges the legitimacy of competing claims by the states and DOJ. Sometimes, federal courts should defer to state court regulation, given traditional state regulation of the practice of law and a host of practical considerations. At other times, federal prosecutors have compelling reasons to seek freedom from both state regulation and regulation …

Judicial Restraints On Illegal State Violence: Israel And The United States, John T. Parry

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article examines the role of courts in controlling state violence in the United States and Israel. The Author considers how U.S. federal courts should respond to illegal state violence by comparing a U.S. Supreme Court case, "City of Los Angeles v. Lyons", with a case decided by the Supreme Court of Israel, Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v. Israel. Part II highlights the legal issues that were central to each court in reaching a decision, including standing, the scope of equitable discretion to craft remedies, and baseline attitudes towards illegal government action. Part III examines the doctrines discussed …

Foreign Relations And Federal Questions: Resolving The Judicial Split On Federal Court Jurisdiction, Erin E. Terrell

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The federal circuit courts have disagreed concerning a fundamental issue of federal court jurisdiction: whether cases that may implicate or involve the "foreign relations" of the United States, but do not otherwise raise a more traditional "federal question" under federal law, may be removed from state courts to federal courts. This Note examines the cases that have created the split, and proposes two potential resolutions to it, one judicial and the other legislative.

The Competency Conundrum: Problems Courts Have Faced In Applying Different Standards For Competency To Be Executed, John L. Farringer, Iv

Vanderbilt Law Review

Throughout Anglo-American legal history, there has been a general agreement, based on numerous rationales, that mentally incompetent inmates should not be executed for their crimes. The recurring problem, however, is how to define "incompetence" or "insanity." Legislatures and courts have sought to provide a common- sense definition, but in practice judges must confront highly technical terminology from the ever evolving field of psychiatry. Additionally, the definition must be flexible enough to apply to a variety of cases, while being universal enough to assure that all defendants are treated fairly and equally.

At hearings to determine a prisoner's competency to be …

Stalking Secret Law: What Predicts Publication In The United States Courts Of Appeals, Deborah J. Merritt, James J. Brudney

Vanderbilt Law Review

For more than a quarter century, the United States Courts of Appeals have maintained two bodies of law. One is published, widely disseminated, and fully precedential. The other, now encompassing nearly 80% of all dispositions on the merits,' is unpublished, erratically distributed, and rarely precedential. What distinguishes these two sets of cases? Is it possible to predict why judges publish opinions in some cases while resolving others through unpublished opinions, memoranda, or judgment orders?

Each court has formal rules governing the publication of opinions, but those standards fail to account for variations in publication. Despite substantial overlap among circuit rules, …

Court Fixing, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article critically examines the existing social science evidence on the relative importance of various individual factors on judicial behavior and adds to that evidence by considering the influence of prior academic experience on judges. Researchers have not focused much attention on the importance of a judge's background as a full-time law professor and legal scholar, although more than thirteen percent of courts of appeals appointees were former law professors. Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan both viewed the federal judiciary (particularly the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals) as integral to their policy agendas, and both further believed that …

Supreme Court Monitoring Of The United States Courts Of Appeals En Banc, Tracey E. George, Michael E. Solimine

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article considers systematically whether the Supreme Court is more likely to review an en banc court of appeals decision than a panel decision. First, we consider Supreme Court review of en banc cases during the Rehnquist Court. Then, in a multivariate empirical analysis of a three-circuit subset of those cases, we control for other variables found to influence the Court's certiorari decision, such as Solicitor General or amicus curiae support for the certiorari petition, a dissent from the court of appeal's opinion, an outcome contrary to the Court's ideological composition, and an intercircuit conflict. The discussion is situated in …

Drug Treatment Courts And Emergent Experimentalist Government, Michael C. Dorf, Charles F. Sabel

Vanderbilt Law Review

Despite the continuing "war on drugs," the last decade has witnessed the creation and nationwide spread of a remarkable set of institutions, drug treatment courts. In drug treatment court, a criminal defendant pleads guilty or otherwise accepts responsibility for a charged offense and accepts placement in a court-mandated program of drug treatment. The judge and court personnel closely monitor the defendant's performance in the program and the program's capacity to serve the mandated client. The federal government and national associations in turn monitor the local drug treatment courts and disseminate successful practices. The ensemble of institutions, monitoring, and pooling exemplifies …

Deciphering Courts Of Appeals Decisions Using The U.S. Courts Of Appeals Data Base, Tracey E. George, Reginald S. Sheehan

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Is one circuit significantly more conservative or liberal than the others? Do circuit courts consistently avoid deciding the substance of certain appeals by concluding that the plaintiffs lack standing? Have state governments been more successful than other parties when they appeal adverse district court rulings? Do appeals courts act in a majoritarian or countermajoritarian manner with regard to elected institutions and the general public? The United States Courts of Appeals Data Base, an extensive data set of courts of appeals decisions, can address these and other questions about the circuit courts. This article describes the background, scope, and content of …

The Dynamics And Determinants Of The Decision To Grant En Banc Review, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The ability of U.S. Courts of Appeals to control the development of law within their respective circuits has been strained by the practice of divisional sittings, the growing caseload at the circuit court level, the increasing number of judges sitting within each circuit, and the decreasing probability of Supreme Court intervention. The primary method of maintaining coherence and consistency in doctrinal development within a federal circuit is en banc review. Yet, many critics contend that en bane rehearing is a time-consuming, inefficient procedure that fails to serve its intended purpose and too often is abused for political ends. This Article …

The Demise Of Hypothetical Jurisdiction In The Federal Courts, Scott C. Idleman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Recent years have witnessed a modest but expanding Supreme Court effort to return the national government to its structural first principles.' Foremost among these is that federal power, although vast, is neither inherent nor unbounded, but consists only of that granted by the Constitution. In 1998, the Court remained steadfast to this precept, thwarting yet another attempt by a federal branch to exceed its limited and enumerated constitutional powers. This time, however, the perpetrator was none other than the Article IH judiciary itself. In Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, the Court formally denounced the federal court practice …

Separate But Not Sovereign: Reconciling Federal Commandeering Of State Courts, Tonya M. Gray

Vanderbilt Law Review

"The question is not what power the federal government ought to have but what powers in fact have been given by the people." Determining the division of power between the states and the federal government has been a debated issue throughout constitutional jurisprudence. Indeed, "[n]o problem has plagued the nation's constitutional history more." In joining the union, the states relinquished power to the federal government. The states were not left without power, as the Tenth Amendment guarantees that powers not enumerated to the federal government or restricted from the states are retained by the states. The broad language of the …

Developing A Positive Theory Of Decisionmaking On U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

As the decisions of the United States Courts of Appeals become an increasingly important part of American legal discourse, the debate concerning adjudication theories of the circuit courts gain particular relevance. Whereas, to date, the issue has received mostly normative treatment, this Article proceeds systematically and confronts the positive inquiry: how do courts of appeals judges actually decide cases? The Article proposes theoretically, tests empirically, and considers the implications of, a combined attitudinal and strategic model of en banc court of appeals decision making. The results challenge the classicist judges, legal scholars, and practitioners' normative frameworks, and suggest positive theory's …

International Law In Mexican Courts, Jorge Cicero

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Recognizing the increasing importance of international law in Mexico, this Article addresses the actual and potential uses of international law in Mexican courts. The Article reviews the ways in which the Mexican system already ensures the judicial consideration of international undertakings, as well as areas of possible improvements. The Article first considers the role and status of international law in the Mexican legal order, including the domestic status of international treaties and agreements, as well as the interaction between national and international norms. Next, the Article focuses on ways to ensure the consideration of international legal questions by Mexico's high …

Kalanke V. Freie Hansestadt Bremen: The Significance Of The Kalanke Decision On Future Positive Action Programs In The European Union, Rebecca Means

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In the landmark case Kalanke v. Freie Hansestadt Bremen, the European Court of Justice held that a German state law giving women an "absolute and unconditional priority" in the labor market was inconsistent with the European Equal Treatment Directive. Although many Europeans vehemently criticized the Kalanke decision initially, the furor now appears to have subsided. As a result of this decision, however, the European Union is currently re-examining equal treatment policies and will likely provide further guidance to Member States attempting to formulate positive action programs.

This Note first discusses the institutions of the European Union as they relate to …

Stratified Juror Selection: Cross-Section By Design, Nancy J. King, G. Thomas Munsterman

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Of the various selection methods that contribute to the underrepresentation of members of racial and ethnic minority groups on juries, peremptory challenges have attracted the most attention in recent years. Yet gains in diversity from regulating, or even eliminating, peremptory challenges are necessarily limited by the composition of the venire from which jurors are chosen. This article describes methods of constructing lists of veniremembers and qualified jurors used by some courts to restore the racial and ethnic diversity that is missing from the primary source lists or is eroded in the process of summoning and qualification. It also evaluates potential …

Issues And Outcomes, Guidance, And Indeterminacy: A Reply To Professor John Rogers And Others, David G. Post, Steven C. Salop

Vanderbilt Law Review

There is now a small but growing literature on the proper voting procedure for multijudge panels. Professor John Rogers began the most recent round of thinking about these vexing issues, arguing that a judge on a multimember panel should never "vote against the result of his or her own reasoning by deferring to a majority on a sub-issue on which the judge differs." We responded, arguing in favor of just such action, which we labeled "issue voting." We criticized Professor Rogers's preferred mode of multimember court adjudication, which we labeled "outcome voting," on the grounds that it provided limited guidance …

"Issue Voting" By Multimember Appellate Courts: A Response To Some Radical Proposals, John M. Rogers

Vanderbilt Law Review

A judge on a multimember appellate court can vote against the result of his or her own reasoning by deferring to a majority on a subissue on which the judge differs. When Justice White did just this in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas,' soon followed by a similarly anomalous vote by Justice Kennedy in Arizona v. Fulminante, I examined the pool of United States Supreme Court cases in which this kind of voting was possible. Out of more than one hundred fifty earlier cases where one or more of the justices might have voted in such a way, only two justices …

Appellate Court Voting Rules, Scott B. Smith

Vanderbilt Law Review

During the 1996 term, the United States Supreme Court made a candid confession about its voting practices. In Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, the Court overruled Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. and recognized that when a justice defers to the majority against his or her own reasoning inconclusive precedent results. Union Gas was particularly unusual because Justice White switched his vote to assure a result in a three-remedy case where none of the three remedies had the support of a majority. In Seminole Tribe, the Court admitted Union Gas "has, since its issuance, been of questionable precedential value, largely …

How Outcome Voting Promotes Principled Issue Identification: A Reply To Professor John Rogers And Others, Maxwell L. Stearns

Vanderbilt Law Review

In his provocative article, "Issue Voting" by Multimember Appellate Courts: A Response to Some Radical Proposals,' Professor John M. Rogers has provided a valuable opportunity for those of us interested in the structural aspects of appellate court decisionmaking--especially Supreme Court decisionmaking--to step back, to compare notes, and to evaluate an increasingly prominent proposal for institutional reform. More importantly, this Colloquium provides an opportunity to explore more deeply several anomalies associated with appellate court decisionmaking. At the outset, I should emphasize that while he devotes a considerable portion of his article to evaluating my scholarship on appellate court decisionmaking, as Professor …

The Ills Of The Federal Sentencing Guidelines And The Search For A Cure: Using Sentence Entrapment To Combat Governmental Manipulation Of Sentencing, Robert S. Johnson

Vanderbilt Law Review

Consider the following scenario:' The police conduct an under- cover sting operation targeting drug traffickers. An undercover officer approaches a suspected drug dealer and arranges to purchase crack cocaine. Over a period of five weeks, the suspect makes seven sales to the officer, and the police arrest him after the final sale. The total amount sold by the defendant was 50.4 grams, just enough to place him within the mandatory minimum sentence of ten years. Had he sold up to 49.9 grams, his mandatory minimum sentence would only have been five years. The district court hearing this case found it …

Service Of U.S. Punitive Damages Complaint Passes Constitutional Muster In Germany, Ingrid L. Lenhardt

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In today's global market, disputes between U.S. and foreign parties have become a common occurrence. Courts in the United States, as well as other nations, frequently face new and complex international litigation problems. A common problem for many courts centers on the practical, mechanical requirements of bringing a lawsuit.

In this Article, the author examines the service of process of U.S. complaints for punitive damages to residents of Germany. In particular, Ms. Lenhardt analyzes the recent German Constitutional Court's ruling on international service of process. In addition, the author reviews the requirements of the Hague Convention on Service Abroad and …

Five Views Of Federalism: "Converse-1983" In Context, Akhil R. Amar

Vanderbilt Law Review

In 1987, I published an overly long article in the Yale Law Journal entitled Of Sovereignty and Federalism. In it, I advanced a "converse-1983" model of federalism-a model that highlighted the ways in which state laws can provide remedies when federal officials violate federal constitutional rights. For example, prior to the 1971 landmark of Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Agents, citizens whose Fourth Amendment rights had been violated by federal officers had no clear federal cause of action; but state trespass law often provided a remedy, and enabled citizens to recover when their "persons, houses, papers, [or] effects" had been …