Courts Commons^™

Theater In The Courtroom, The Chicago Conspiracy Trial, Pnina Lahav

Faculty Scholarship

The Chicago Conspiracy Trial (otherwise known as the Chicago Seven Trial) is a Rorschach test of American society in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Following the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1968, leaders of the antiwar movement, the counterculture and the Black Panthers were put on trial for a "conspiracy to cross state lines with intent to incite a riot." The trial has been too easily dismissed as a circus, not worthy of legal attention, when in fact it does contain important legal insights. This paper suggests that the theory of the theater provides the key …

A Constitution For Judicial Lawmaking, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

When courts decide cases, the decisions make law because they become precedent that binds future courts under the doctrine of stare decisis. This article argues that some principles governing judicial lawmaking are functionally constitutional principles because they go to the validity of a particular attempt at judicial lawmaking (just as the constitutional principles governing legislative lawmaking determine the validity of lawmaking by legislatures). Because even poorly reasoned judicial decisions can still be effective lawmaking acts, it is important to distinguish between constitutional and non-constitutional principles and arguments. While a non-constitutional principle can be a basis for examining the wisdom or …

A Tournament Of Judges?, Stephen Choi, Mitu Gulati

Faculty Scholarship

We suggest a Tournament of Judges where the reward to the winner is elevation to the Supreme Court. Politics (and ideology) surely has a role to play in the selection of justices. However, the present level of partisan bickering has resulted in delays in judicial appointments as well as undermined the public's confidence in the objectivity of justices selected through such a process. More significantly, much of the politicking is not transparent, often obscured with statements on a particular candidate's "merit"- casting a taint on all those who make their way through the judicial nomination process. We argue that the …

The Rehnquist Court’S Two Federalisms, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

For And Against Marriage: A Revision., Anita Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Labor And Employment Decisions: 2002-2003 Term, Maria O'Brien

Faculty Scholarship

This article summarizes U.S. Supreme Court cases from the October 2002 term that related directly or indirectly to labor or employment law or have implications for labor and employment practitioners. Of particular interest are the University of Michigan affirmative action cases' and the Texas criminal sodomy case. ² Although not nominally "labor and employment" cases, these cases will profoundly affect labor and employment issues. Lawrence v. Texas has already altered the lenses through which society views homosexuality and altered public discourse related to homosexuality and same-sex relationships. ³ The reasoning of the Court shows how far issues of sexuality have …

Archetypal Trials And The Management Of Dissent: Some Insights From Marketing Theory, Pnina Lahav

Faculty Scholarship

Recent marketing theory uses the Jungian concept of the archetype to design strategies for the improvement of product selling. Mark and Pearson propose that archetypes such as the ruler, the hero, the outlaw, and the sage are useful in promoting a product. This article suggests that the concept of archetypes as well as myths such as the Prometheus myth and the myth of the expulsion from Paradise, when combined with the insights offered by Mark and Pearson, may help in understanding the management of trials of dissent as well. The article presents seven motifs that recur in trials of dissent …

A Six-Three Rule: Reviving Consensus And Deference On The Supreme Court, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, the Supreme Court has struck down federal statutes by a bare majority with unprecedented frequency. This Article shows that five-four decisions regularly overturning acts of Congress are a relatively recent phenomenon, whereas earlier Courts generally exercised judicial review by supermajority voting.

One option is to establish the following rule: The Supreme Court may not declare an act of Congress unconstitutional without a two-thirds majority. The Supreme Court itself could establish this rule internally, just as it has created its nonmajority rules for granting certiorari and holds, or one Justice who would otherwise be the fifth …

Hearing Voices: Speaker Identification In Court, Lawrence Solan, Peter Tiersma

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Modeling Supreme Court Strategic Decision Making: The Congressional Constraint, Barak D. Richman, Mario Bergara, Pablo T. Spiller

Faculty Scholarship

This paper addresses the contradictory results obtained by Segal (1997) and Spiller and Gely (1992) concerning the impact of institutional constraints on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision making. By adapting the Spiller and Gely maximum likelihood model to the Segal dataset, we find support for the hypothesis that the Court adjusts its decisions to presidential and congressional preferences. Data from 1947 to 1992 indicate that the average probability of the Court being constrained has been approximately one-third. Further, we show that the results obtained by Segal are the product of biases introduced by a misspecified econometric model. We also discuss …

Constitutional Existence Conditions And Judicial Review, Matthew D. Adler, Michael C. Dorf

Faculty Scholarship

Although critics of judicial review sometimes call for making the entire Constitution nonjusticiable, many familiar norms of constitutional law state what we call "existence conditions" that are necessarily enforced by judicial actors charged with the responsibility of applying, and thus as a preliminary step, identifying, propositions of sub-constitutional law such as statutes. Article I, Section 7, which sets forth the procedures by which a bill becomes a law, is an example: a putative law that did not go through the Article I, Section 7 process and does not satisfy an alternative test for legal validity (such as the treaty-making provision …

Constitutional Courts: Opportunities And Pitfalls, Donald L. Horowitz

Faculty Scholarship

This memorandum considers how to design constitutional courts to be most effective. With reference to examples such as Hungary, Italy, and Russia, the article examines dimensions including jurisdiction, appointment and tenure, and the effect of judicial declarations of unconstitutionality. The article also examines how a carefully designed and properly limited constitutional court can aid the creation of the rule of law, with specific reference to Afghanistan.

When All Of Us Are Victims: Juror Prejudice And ‘Terrorist’ Trials, Neil Vidmar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Accomplishing The Purposes Of Sentencing–The Role Of The Courts And The Commission, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rationalizing The Commission: The Philosophical Premises Of The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Theorizing Community Justice Through Community Courts, Jeffery Fagan, Victoria Malkin

Faculty Scholarship

Community justice practitioners argue that the justice system has long ignored its biggest clients-citizens and neighborhoods that suffer the everyday consequences of high crime levels. One response from legal elites has been a package of court innovations and new practices known as "community justice," part of a broader appeal to "community" and "partnership" common now in modern discourse on crime control. This concept incorporates several contemporary visions and expressions of justice within the popular and legal literatures: problem-solving courts (such as drug courts, mental health courts, domestic violence courts, gun courts, and, of course, juvenile courts); the inclusion of victims …

Statutory Inflation And Institutional Choice, Lawrence Solan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Norm Of Prior Judicial Experience And Its Consequences For Career Diversity On The U.S. Supreme Court, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Andrew D. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Problem-Solving Courts: From Innovation To Institutionalization, Michael C. Dorf, Jeffrey A. Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

The phenomenal growth of drug courts and other forms of "problem-solving" courts has followed a pattern that is characteristic of many successful innovations: An individual or small group has or stumbles upon a new idea; the idea is put into practice and appears to work; a small number of other actors adopt the innovation and have similar experiences; if there is great demand for the innovation – for example, because it responds to a widely-perceived crisis or satisfies an institutional need and resolves tensions within organizations that adopt it – the innovation rapidly diffuses through the networks in which the …

Criminal Defenders And Community Justice: The Drug Court Example, William H. Simon

Faculty Scholarship

The Community Justice idea and its core institution – the Community Court – is an ambitious innovation intended to generate new solutions and practices. It thus inevitably calls for adaptation of the established roles associated with the court system, and especially the criminal justice system. It asks practitioners to learn new skills, to accept new conventions, and to participate in the elaboration of a rapidly evolving experiment.

It is thus not surprising that many lawyers are anxious about the system. It remains an interesting question, however, whether their anxiety represents something more than the discomfort that change and challenge typically …

Why Defenders Feel Defensive, Jane M. Spinak

Faculty Scholarship

The newest version of problem-solving courts has scarcely reached adolescence. Many of these courts remain in the "model" stage, attempting to create a structure and vision that will have a transformative, systemic effect. Others, drug courts in particular, have proliferated across the country and are on the verge of going to scale in many states. Lawyers representing individual clients in these courts are struggling to identify, define and perform their professional duties, at the same time that the courts are being created. To understand why it is a struggle, we need to contextualize the lawyers' experiences: what is it about …

Unprincipled Punishment: The U.S. Sentencing Commission's Troubling Silence About The Purposes Of Punishment, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Political (Science) Context Of Judging, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Andrew D. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Marbury And Judicial Deference: The Shadow Of Whittington V. Polk And The Maryland Judiciary Battle, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

On the 200th anniversary of Whittington and approaching the 200th anniversary of Marbury, this article revisits these two decisions and challenges legal scholars' assumptions that they were such strong precedents for judicial review.⁵ When one takes into account the broader contexts, both decisions were in fact judicial capitulations to aggressive legislatures and executives. The Maryland General Court asserted its judicial supremacy only in dicta, and the court failed to enforce judicial supremacy when it was legally justified. This article picks apart the court's reasoning step by step, using Whittington to illuminate Marbury and Marbury to illuminate Whittington. …

The Linguist On The Witness Stand: Forensic Linguistics In American Courts, Lawrence Solan, Peter Tiersma

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Unhappy History Of Civil Rights Legislation, Fifty Years Later, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

Seldom, if ever, have the power and the purposes of legislation been rendered so impotent.... All that is left today are afew scattered remnants of a once grandiose scheme to nationalize the fundamental rights of the individual.

These words were written fifty years ago by Eugene Gressman, now William Rand Kenan, Jr. Professor Emeritus, University of North Carolina School of Law, as a description of what the courts, primarily the Supreme Court of the United States, had done with the civil rights legislation passed by Congress in the wake of the Civil War. Professor Gressman's article, The Unhappy History of …

Constitutional Pluralism And Democratic Politics: Reflections On The Interpretive Approach Of Baker V. Carr, Guy-Uriel Charles

Faculty Scholarship

Baker v. Carr is one of the Supreme Court's most important opinions, not least because its advent signaled the constitutionalization of democracy. Unfortunately, as is typical of the Court's numerous forays into democratic politics, the decision is not accompanied by an apparent vision of the relationship among democratic practice, constitutional law, and democratic theory. In this Article, Professor Charles revisits Baker and provides several democratic principles that he argues justifies the Court's decision to engage the democratic process. He examines the decision from the perspective of one of its chief contemporary critics, Justice Frankfurter. He sketches an approach, described as …

U.S. Announces Intent Not To Ratify International Criminal Court Treaty, Curtis A. Bradley

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Specialized Trial Courts: Concentrating Expertise On Fact, Arti K. Rai

Faculty Scholarship

In the absence of a specialized patent trial court with expertise in fact-finding, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit often reviews de novo the many factual questions that pervade patent law. De novo review of fact by an appellate court is problematic. In the area of patent law, as in other areas of law, there are sound institutional justifications for the conventional division of labor that gives trial courts primary responsibility for questions of law. This Article identifies the problems created by de novo appellate review of fact and argues for the creation of a specialized trial court …

Agency Rules With The Force Of Law: The Original Convention, Thomas W. Merrill, Kathryn Tongue Watts

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court recently held in United States v. Mead Corp. that agency interpretations should receive Chevron deference only when Congress has delegated power to the agency to make rules with the force of law and the agency has rendered its interpretation in the exercise of that power The first step of this inquiry is difficult to apply to interpretations adopted through rulemaking, because often rulemaking grants authorize the agency to make "such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter" or words to that effect, without specifying whether "rules and regulations" encompasses rules …