Courts Commons^™

The Brady Materiality Standard, Brandon L. Garrett, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

The Brady doctrine requires prosecutors to disclose all favorable and material evidence to the defense. To effectuate that rule, the U.S. Supreme Court has defined materiality as a “reasonable probability” that the evidence would have affected the outcome at trial. But apart from that definition, the Court has resisted offering any further guidance to lower courts. While far too little is known about how Brady materiality claims are actually adjudicated, there is strong evidence that courts often reject Brady claims involving withheld evidence on the grounds that the evidence was not significant enough to be material.

To examine how Brady …

Is History Precedent?, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

It has been just over three years since the Supreme Court instructed lower courts to evaluate Second Amendment challenges by examining history and tradition. And it is no secret that the courts have struggled. This Article tackles a phenomenon that is born of that struggle. Overwhelmed by the task of evaluating historical claims, lower courts instead are turning to other judges as authorities on history. They are using what I call in this Article “historical precedents”—meaning language about history from an older decision that the subsequent judge then treats as authority, not as part of a legal rule but for …

The Bankruptcy Judge And The Generalist Tradition, Alexander Gouzoules

Faculty Publications

The prevailing academic consensus is that bankruptcy judges are specialists presiding over specialized courts. This Article contends that this description is incomplete and, in some respects, inaccurate. Drawing on scholarly models of judicial specialization and historical surveys of the field, this Article contends that bankruptcy judges reflect a hybrid design choice: procedural specialization combined with substantive generalism. This model delivers many of the observed benefits of judicial specialization (including efficiency and technical competence) while preserving the cross-pollination of ideas and other benefits associated with the generalist tradition of American judging.

This Article also reflects on contemporary developments—most notably the rise …

The Judicial Voice On The Courts Of Appeals, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

The judicial voice on an appellate court typically speaks in the collective, so when a judge chooses to go solo—either in a dissent or a concurrence—that act deserves a close look. Separate opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court are common because the Justices have strong incentives to articulate a distinctive personal jurisprudence. But lower court judges have always been more reluctant to write separately, and for good reason. The institutional design and longstanding practices of the U.S. courts of appeals are very different from the Supreme Court: Lower appellate court judges are bound by precedent in a different way, rarely …

To The Hague And Beyond: The Shifting Terrain Of International Criminal Justice, Leila Nadya Sadat, Valerie Oosterveld, Sharon Weil, Nancy Combs, David Crane

Faculty Publications

Panel of international criminal law experts speak about the areas in which they work.

Second-Guessing The Jury: The Federal Circuit's Flawed Take On Enhanced Damages In Halo V. Pulse, Dennis D. Crouch

Faculty Publications

This article critically examines the Federal Circuit's February 2025 decision in Halo v. Pulse, focusing on the court's approach to enhanced damages in patent infringement cases. The analysis identifies a fundamental tension between jury findings of willful infringement under a clear and convincing evidence standard and the district court's subsequent discretion to deny enhanced damages by essentially reconsidering the same evidence. The article argues that the Federal Circuit's affirmation of this approach undermines the Supreme Court's 2016 Halo decision, which sought to make enhanced damages more accessible in cases of egregious misconduct. By creating an artificial distinction between "willful infringement" …

Million-Dollar Mysteries: Recent Complex Patent Cases Lost To Rule 36, Dennis D. Crouch

Faculty Publications

This article examines the Federal Circuit's continued use of Rule 36 summary affirmances to dispose of complex patent cases without written opinions. Through analysis of eight recent Rule 36 cases decided in early 2025, the author demonstrates that sophisticated legal issues involving millions of dollars are being summarily affirmed despite presenting novel and important questions of patent law. The cases discussed involve design patent evidentiary standards, jury trial rights for hybrid legal-equitable claims, analogous art determinations, claim construction, written description requirements, and PTAB procedural issues. The author argues that while the court may be avoiding difficult cases with complex factual …

The Longer-Term Impact Of Civil Justice Reform: A 10-Year Retrospective On Utah Civil Discovery Reform, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Miriam Hamilton

Faculty Publications

In 2021, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) obtained grant funding from State Justice Institute to undertake a retrospective study of the Utah civil justice reforms. The new study replicated some of the analyses from the 2015 study to compare case characteristics and outcomes against the post-implementation data extracted for the 2015 study. In addition to examining the impact on case characteristics and outcomes, an objective of the new study was to examine the impact of the Rule 26 revisions on practitioner behavior, which is less easily captured in case filings. To do so, NCSC convened a project advisory …

Discovery, Injury, And Diligence: Reconciling Subjective And Objective Copyright Limitations Standards Post-Warner Chappell, Dennis D. Crouch, Timothy Knight

Faculty Publications

This Article examines the evolving interpretation of the Copyright Act's statute of limitations in light of RADesign, Inc. v. Michael Grecco Productions, Inc., a case pending before the Supreme Court. Following the Court's decision in Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy (2024), which left open the question of whether copyright claims can be based on infringement occurring more than three years prior, the circuit courts remain split on whether the three-year statute of limitations runs from the time of infringement (the "injury rule") or from when the copyright holder discovers the infringement (the "discovery rule"). Through analysis of the Grecco …

Federal Circuit’S Filing Requirements: A Trap For Even The Experts, Dennis D. Crouch

Faculty Publications

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has established itself as the most procedurally demanding appellate court in the federal system, routinely issuing notices of non-compliance even to the nation's most experienced practitioners. This essay examines the pervasive nature of filing errors in Federal Circuit appeals, analyzing examples from recent cases involving prestigious law firms and institutions. Despite the court's 2023 memo detailing "Common Filing Errors," practitioners continue to struggle with requirements ranging from form completion and addenda formatting to confidentiality designations and caption compliance. The article argues that the prevalence of these issues among highly qualified counsel suggests a systemic …

Comparative Lessons For Enhancing Representation In The U.S. Judiciary - And Countering Democratic Decline, Shruti Rana

Faculty Publications

At this precarious moment for democratic institutions and the rule of law in the United States, this Essay draws upon efforts to build more representative judiciaries in other countries and in international fora to identify promising strategies for enhancing representation in the U.S. judiciary, particularly with respect to gender and parity. 23 It argues that efforts to enhance judicial representation and parity in the United States could benefit from incorporating and building upon international legal principles and the practices of international courts, institutions, and organizations with respect to parity and representation. Crucially, at the same time, efforts to ensure greater …

Historical Practice At The Founding, Ryan Snyder

Faculty Publications

In recent years, the Supreme Court has increasingly relied on historical practice—actions other than judicial decisions that implement the law after its adoption. That creates tension with the Court’s professed adherence to originalism—the view that a law’s meaning is fixed at the time of its adoption. To resolve this tension, the Court and many scholars have embraced theories such as “liquidation,” which argue that the Founders themselves used practice to update or change the law’s meaning over time. But until now, no one has systematically examined whether the Founders accepted those theories.

This Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of …

Emergency Oversight, Catherine Baylin Duryea

Faculty Publications

This Article examines one of the most pressing questions in administrative law: How much judicial oversight should administrative agencies face during an emergency? This issue was particularly salient during the COVID epidemic, but it is not new. The Second World War saw a significant expansion and consolidation of the power of administrative agencies as well as experimentation with the appropriate oversight role for courts. This Article analyzes one such experiment: judicial oversight of agencies implementing wartime anti-inflationary measures, i.e., price controls and rationing. During the war, Congress created a specialized court, the Emergency Court of Appeals (ECA), to hear disputes …

Understanding The Mechanisms Of Interpretative Change, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

Interpretive methodology changes over time, and we appear to be in a period of particular ferment. In federal statutory interpretation, which is the focus of this Article, several important changes in interpretive methods have occurred in recent decades or are underway. There has been a gradual, decades-long shift away from intentionalist tools like legislative history. In addition, as the culmination of a series of smaller steps, the Supreme Court has just reshaped the doctrine governing deference to agency interpretations, a move that will require years of further clarification. And, although this shift is still taking shape, it appears that some …

Rebuilding The Foundation: Addressing A Crisis In Juror Participation, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

Courts are experiencing dramatic decreases in juror response and appearance rates, threatening the future of jury trials and the legitimacy of the American justice system. Effective strategies exist to reverse this trend, if justice system stakeholders are willing to employ them.

Preserving The Future Of Juries And Jury Trials, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

Amid rapid technological and social change, a new initiative explores how judges, court staff, trial lawyers, and other justice system stakeholders can preserve juries and jury trials, strengthen public trust, and remain a pillar of democracy.

In 2024, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) launched Preserving the Future of Juries and Jury Trials, a project that built on Just Horizons’ methodological foundation of strategic foresight and its premise that data-driven public services and sociopolitical discord have the greatest potential impact on court operations. For this project, NCSC imagined how these trends would affect juries and jury trials in each …

History's Identity Crisis, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

Lower court judges across the country are struggling to manage the Supreme Court’s new “history and tradition” test that applies to Second Amendment challenges. This Article articulates one fundamental reason for the struggle: nobody is quite sure what a judge is actually doing when she evaluates claims about what happened in the past. Is it traditional legal reasoning— weighing evidence and looking for patterns? Is it fact-finding of the sort we think expert historians should testify about—conveying to a trial judge the best evidence we have about the purpose of colonial gun laws? Or is it a different sort of …

Preserving The Future Of Juries And Jury Trials, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Hope Forbush, Miriam Hamilton, Jawwaad Johnson, Morgan Moffett

Faculty Publications

To preserve the future of juries and jury trials, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) convened a meeting of representatives from a broad array of justice system stakeholders as a project under the Justice for All Reauthorization Act (JFARA). To frame the stakeholder discussions, NCSC employed strategic foresight, a methodological approach designed to explore a range of possible futures of juries and jury trials within the American justice system as a vehicle for identifying critical vulnerabilities within the current jury system and proposing targeted strategies to preserve and strengthen jury trials. Critical vulnerabilities are those areas of weakness that …

Law And Equity On Appeal, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

Most lawyers know that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure merged the divergent trial procedures of the common law and of equity, but fewer are familiar with the development of federal appellate procedure. Here too there is a story of the merger of two distinct systems. At common law, a reviewing court examined the record for errors of law after the final trial judgment. In the equity tradition, an appeal was a rehearing of the law and the facts that aimed at achieving justice and did not need to await a final judgment. Unlike the story of federal trial procedure, …

The Obvious Violation Exception To Qualified Immunity: An Empirical Study, Bailey D. Barnes

Faculty Publications

Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil suits for discretionary actions, as long as the violated right is not clearly established. A right is deemed established when every reasonable official would understand it based on precedent, placing it beyond debate, such that only the plainly incompetent may be held liable. Consequently, even when an act infringes on one's civil rights, a court may deny relief owing to a lack of factually comparable precedent. However, in 2020, the Supreme Court indicated its distrust for overreliance on precedent in certain contexts. In Taylor v. Riojas, the Court held that prison officials violated …

Judges Should Be Discerning Consensus, Not Evaluating Scientific Expertise, David S. Caudill, Harry Collins, Robert Evans

Faculty Publications

One of the most constructive critiques of the Daubert admissibility regime is Professor Edward Cheng’s recent proposal for a new Consensus Rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence. Rejecting the notion that judges and juries have the capacity to evaluate scientific expertise, Cheng’s proposal would eliminate Daubert hearings—and judicial gatekeeping concerning expert testimony—and require judges and juries, in their verdicts, to follow consensus in the relevant scientific community. Significantly, Cheng argues that judges and juries would have an easier time identifying consensus than they have in deciding between experts who disagree.

We find Cheng’s emphasis on consensus compelling, and …

Rebalancing Judicial Immunity For Civil Rights Actions, Bailey D. Barnes

Faculty Publications

Sterilization for shorter jail sentences. Vasectomies and birth control implants for freedom. In 2017, a criminal court judge in rural Tennessee made this offer to people incarcerated through sentences issued by his court. When litigators sought monetary damages and to enjoin the practice, and the local media exposed the scheme, the judge begrudgingly rescinded the order while expressing surprise that it was controversial. The Board of Judicial Conduct issued a letter of reprimand to the judge. Meanwhile, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee summarily dismissed the constitutional tort claims against the judge based on absolute …

Fair Cross Section And Tribal Jury Composition: Vawa 2022 Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction Series, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Steve Aycock

Faculty Publications

The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA 2013) amended the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) to ensure that non-Indian criminal defendants in Tribal courts have the right to a trial by an impartial jury that is drawn from sources that 1) “reflect a fair cross section of the community” and 2) “do not systematically exclude any distinctive group in the community, including non-Indians.” This requirement applies when a non-Indian who is criminally prosecuted in Tribal court faces possible imprisonment.

The implementation of these jury provisions has been a topic of discussion among the Inter-Tribal Working Group on Special …

Criminal Courteaucracy, Evelyn Malavé

Faculty Publications

Scholars have increasingly recognized that criminal courts in the age of mass incarceration, particularly lower criminal courts, have effectively shifted from an adjudicatory system of justice to a managerial system of justice. Rather than adjudicating guilt or innocence, criminal courts are engaged in risk management and social control. However, literature on criminal courts has almost exclusively focused on judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys, and their roles in the adjudication of criminal cases. This Article will focus instead on the managerial function of criminal courts by shining a spotlight on a less-scrutinized set of actors: criminal-court administrators.

Through an in-depth case …

Breaking The Vicious Cycle Fragmenting National Law, Ryan Vacca, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Publications

One of the most troubling and increasingly overlooked problems plaguing the federal judiciary has been the reduction of throughput at the Supreme Court and the resulting fragmentation of national law. The imperative to resolve circuit splits has taken a back seat as the Court grapples with high-profile battles and the relentless crush of certiorari petitions. This fuels confusion and greater fragmentation of national law. Add in the general expansion of national law, and the vicious cycle intensifies.

This Article proposes a solution for expanding structural capacity to address fragmentation that does not require legislative reform or constitutional amendment. It utilizes …

2023 State-Of-The-States Survey Of Jury Improvement Efforts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Morgan Moffett, Breanna Bell

Faculty Publications

In 2007, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) published findings from the State-of-the-States Survey of Jury Improvement Efforts (SOS Survey), the first comprehensive snapshot of jury operations and jury trial practices in the United States. The 2007 SOS Survey featured three discrete components: a statewide survey documenting legal infrastructure for juries and jury trials in each state; a local court survey, which documented jury operations at the county-level in state courts; and a judge & lawyer survey, which asked respondents to describe the characteristics and procedures employed in their most recent jury trial.

By the mid-2010s, NCSC began receiving …

The Constitutional Court Of Kosovo In Comparative Perspective, Christie S. Warren

Faculty Publications

...presented at the Solemn Ceremony of the 14th Judicial Year of the Constitutional Court, held on 23 October 2023 in Prishtina and on the occasion of the International Conference “Contribution of Constitutional Courts in the protection and strengthening of the fundamental values of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental human rights and freedoms”, organized on 24 October 2023 in Prishtina.

The Constitutional Court Of Indonesia As A Post-Conflict Institution, Christie S. Warren

Faculty Publications

In post-conflict settings, constitutional courts have important roles to play despite complex and often competing challenges they face to institutionalize their legitimacy and entrench the rule of law while attempting to build bridges from conflict to peace. By processing political conflict through legal means, constitutional courts can shift the tenor of public dialogue and provide a less inflammatory platform for analyzing conflicts that have divided societies. This article analyzes two seminal cases decided by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia in the aftermath of post- Suharto conflict and finds that despite its young age, the Court addressed lustration issues and a …

Standing Without Injury, Jonathan Adler

Faculty Publications

This Article seeks to assess Judge Newsom’s proposed injury-less approach to standing in federal court. Part I of this Article provides a brief overview of current standing doctrine, the requirements of standing consolidated in Lujan, and how these requirements have been interpreted and applied by the Supreme Court. Part II describes Judge Newsom’s critique of contemporary standing doctrine and outlines the two primary components of his proposed alternative: 1) elimination of the standing requirement in favor of a simple cause-of-action requirement and 2) recognition of an external constraint on standing derived from Article II, rather than Article III.

Part …

The Reno Court Of Inquiry, Albert Winkler

Faculty Publications

Following the Battle of the Little Big Horn, there had been many accusations of poor conduct, neglect of duty, or outright cowardice leveled chiefly at both Major Marcus Reno and Captain Frederick Benteen for their actions or inactions at the engagement, which could have led to the destruction of Custer's command. Most significantly, Frederick Whittaker's attack on Reno and Benteen in his A Complete Life of Gen. George Armstrong Custer published in December 1876 was simply scathing.