Courts Commons^™

Original Intent And Article Iii, Michael L. Wells, Edward J. Larson

Scholarly Works

Article III of the United States Constitution sets limits on the ability of the legislature to expand or contract the jurisdiction of the federal courts. The Supreme Court has generally held that Article III's restraints on the power of the legislature to restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts are few and extremely permissive. Many scholars, however, argue that Article III imposes some strong limitations on the legislature's ability to define federal jurisdiction. Strangely, both sides of the debate rely on originalist arguments. This Article argues that reliance on the Framers' intent to resolve issues of federal courts law is …

Positivism And Antipositivism In Federal Courts Law, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

What is the proper role of rules in federal courts law? Some scholars associated with the Legal Process assert that rules are unimportant here. They believe that the values of principled adjudication and reasoned elaboration should take precedence over the making and application of rules. The area is, in the jargon of jurisprudence, "antipositivist." Others maintain that rules do, or at any rate should, count heavily in federal courts' decisionmaking. In this Article, I argue that Legal Process scholars are right to spurn formalism in most parts of federal courts law. But the Legal Process model of federal courts law …

Obstacles To The Creation Of A Permanent War Crimes Tribunal, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Individual liability for war crimes is difficult to enforce and is unlikely to be accepted uniformly by states.

Individual criminal responsibility is the cornerstone of any international war crimes tribunal. Nuremberg Principle I provides that “[a]ny person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.” Acts by heads of state or other government officials, even if committed in an official capacity, may not constitute an immunity defense to or mitigate criminality. These officials, therefore, could also be held responsible for offenses committed pursuant to their orders. Additionally, liability for criminal …

French And American Judicial Opinions, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

In this Article, I examine the foundations of American judicial form, in particular the proposition that powerful instrumental considerations support the issuance of reasoned opinions. This project proceeds from the belief that the form of judicial opinions deserves serious scholarly attention despite the broad consensus about its value, because it frames the terms of debate on every issue courts confront. My analysis is built on the view that critical insights into the nature of one's own legal system can be gleaned only by "understand[ing] what [one's] system is not," a task that requires putting aside the internal perspective of a …

The Georgia Jury And Negligence: The View From The Trenches, R. Perry Sentell Jr.

Scholarly Works

This is the third part of a project devoted to analyzing the Georgia negligence jury. The project employed as its original point of departure the extensive Chicago Jury Study of the 1960s, directed by Chicago Law Professor Harry Kalven, Jr. That Study's immortality derives principally from its famous first premise: Meaningful evaluation of the jury system must originate from within the system itself. That premise propelled Professor Kalven through a massive national survey of trial judges. The judges' responses, under Kalven's insightful analysis, yielded an unprecedented profile of the American jury. In foundational fashion, those responses indelibly etched into legal …

Voting Behavior On The Texas Court Of Criminal Appeals, 1991-92, Keith A. Rowley, Michael D. Weiss

Scholarly Works

Between early 1991, when Judge Fortunato Benavides was appointed to replace Judge Marvin O. Teague, and July 1, 1992, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals decided 251 cases where the ultimate question at stake was whether or not an accused individual would receive punishment for his or her alleged wrongdoing. While the sitting judges unanimously decided roughly one-half of these cases, 133 cases resulted in one or more dissenting votes. Furthermore, a margin of two votes or less decided thirty-five cases.

The purpose of this Article is to analyze and, if possible, explain the voting behavior of the members of …

The Stare Decisis "Exception" To The Chevron Deference Rule, Rebecca White

Scholarly Works

In this article, the author discusses how Chevron intersects with one important competing norm - stare decisis. Stare decisis counsels the Court to adhere to its own decisions, particularly statutory ones, absent substantial justification for departure. To what extent should stare decisis apply when an agency's interpretation of a statute, otherwise deserving of deference under Chevron, conflicts with a prior interpretation of the statute by the Supreme Court?

This article suggests the following answer: If the Court's prior opinion upheld the agency's interpretation as one reasonable reading of the statute, but not the only one possible, and the agency thereafter …

The Georgia Jury And Negligence: The View From The (Federal) Bench, R. Perry Sentell Jr.

Scholarly Works

This is the second part of a two-part inquiry into the quality of jury performance in Georgia negligence cases. Evaluation begins from within. That is an especially prominent truth in respect to the trial of negligence cases. The lay-professional partnership composing the civil trial system is unique. the professional's continuity provides a point of perfect perspective on the transient lay component--both its capacity and its performance. If the professional will share that perspective, it can structure a benchmark for foundational appraisal. To their great credit, the state and federal trial judges of Georgia are unstinting in assisting to construct that …

International Judicial Assistance, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

The general or even specialized practitioner faces serious difficulties as the world shrinks and the practice of law frequently transcends international boundaries. In the civil and commercial arena, issues of discovery and service of documents abroad, others relating to judicial assistance from foreign courts, available to American courts or individual litigants, and assistance available from American courts for foreign governments and individual litigants, can be mindboggling. In an age where transnational litigation (that is, domestic litigation that touches upon one or more foreign jurisdictions) is rapidly increasing, counsel could be guilty of malpractice if counsel takes action abroad that proves …

The Need For An International Criminal Court In The New International World Order, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Any inquiry into the merits of an international criminal court must start with resolving three basic issues:

1. Can the tribunal improve international cooperation in law enforcement, add to the capabilities of the various nations in matters of international criminal law, or contribute in any incremental way to the solution of international and transnational criminal law problems by improving the current practice and enhancing the effectiveness of all concerned?

2. Will the recommended system have a better or equal chance of operating as effectively as the best existing systems of national criminal justice?

3. Will the recommended system improve efficiency …

Sanctions, Symmetry, And Safe Harbors: Limiting Misapplication Of Rule 11 By Harmonizing It With Pre-Verdict Dismissal Devices, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

With only a small risk of overstatement, one could say that sanctions in civil litigation exploded during the 1980s, with the 1983 amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 acting as the principal catalyst. From 1938 until the 1983 amendment, only two dozen or so cases on Rule 11 were reported, with courts rarely imposing sanctions. Although a few cases were notable by virtue of sanction size, prestige of the firm sanctioned, or publicity attending the underlying case, the legal profession largely regarded Rule 11 as a dead letter. In addition, other sanctions provisions, such as Federal Rule of …

Behind The Parity Debate: The Decline Of The Legal Process Tradition In The Law Of Federal Courts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Whether there is parity between federal and state courts has become a central question in the law of federal courts, dividing judges and commentators into two well-defined camps. Although the issue rarely arose thirty years ago, it now enters into virtually every discussion of the rules concerning access to federal court for constitutional claims. On one side of the debate, advocates of broad federal jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to state action claim that federal courts are better than state courts at adjudicating these controversies. On the other side, advocates of state court jurisdiction insist that state courts are fully adequate …

The Constitutional Case Against Intracircuit Nonacquiescence, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

A cornerstone of the United States Constitution is its separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the national government. The Framers of the Constitution reasoned that separated powers would guard against tyranny by blocking the undue concentration of authority in any single governmental department. In crafting the Constitution, however, the Framers could not anticipate every dispute their scheme of separated powers might engender. One modern separation-of-powers conflict not specifically anticipated by the constitutional text involves so-called "intracircuit nonacquiescence.”

Intracircuit nonacquiescence occurs when executive-branch decision makers refuse to follow a circuit court's precedents even when acting subject …

Against An Elite Federal Judiciary: Comments On The Report Of The Federal Courts Study Committee, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

No doubt some reform of the federal courts is essential if they are to cope with the proliferation of litigation over the past thirty years and the resulting "congestion, delay, expense, and expansion" in the federal courts. While the problem may not amount to an "impending crisis", the burgeoning caseload surely poses a threat, at least in the long run, to the ability of the federal courts to function effectively. The hard question is not whether something should be done, but what to do about it. There is no shortage of interesting ideas. Some of the ideas that clamor for …

Authoritarianism And The Rule Of Law, Lynne Henderson

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Finding Harmony Amidst Disagreement Over Extradition, Jurisdiction, The Role Of Human Rights, And Issues Of Extraterritoriality Under International Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

This Article examines extradition and jurisdiction over extraterritorial crime, focusing on the relationship between jurisdiction and extradition in the broader context of human rights law. The authors challenge what they argue are chimerical, although strongly held beliefs in the incompatibility of European and United States criminal justice systems and extradition practices. They argue that cooperation in matters of international criminal law may be enhanced, while protection of human rights is promoted. The authors establish this possibility by breaking down the barriers to understanding that stem from the divergent European versus Anglo-American modes of analysis.

The authors first analyze the five …

International Law Principles Governing The Extraterritorial Application Of Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece Professor Blakesley provides remarks on the differences and similarities between Germany and the United States on international principles of jurisdiction over extraterritorial crime.

International Year In Review: Developments In International Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece Professor Blakesley provides remarks on recent developments in International Criminal Law.

Immunity From Regulatory Price Squeeze Claims: From Keogh, Parker, And Noerr To Town Of Concord And Beyond, Keith A. Rowley

Scholarly Works

On September 21, 1990, the First Circuit handed down its decision in Town of Concord, Massachusetts v. Boston Edison Co. This case, the most recent in a growing line of court of appeals decisions examining the antitrust implications of public utility rate structures, represents the first time a United States court of appeals has unequivocally stated that an antitrust action based upon a “price squeeze” could not be maintained against a utility whose wholesale and retail rates were both fully regulated. Town of Concord notwithstanding, the courts are far from agreeing whether investor-owned electric or natural gas utilities are immune …

Equal Protection And The Procedural Bar Doctrine In Federal Habeas Corpus, Laura Dooley

Scholarly Works

Winford L. Stokes, Jr. and Theodore C. Harris had much in common. Both were death-row inmates in the late 1980s. Both were convicted of murder following bifurcated jury trials in which they later alleged that they had not received effective assistance of counsel as required by the federal Constitution. Both inmates sought collateral review of their convictions in federal courts. The similarities between them end there. Because Stokes had procedurally defaulted on his federal constitutional claim in state court under the law of Missouri, the federal appeals court refused to consider the merits of his federal constitutional claim.' Harris, on …

Pitfalls Of Public Policy: The Case Of Arbitration Agreements, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

As the juxtaposition of these quotations suggests, judges have long held disparate views on the legitimacy and value of “public policy” considerations as a basis for legal decision making. The popular notion posits that Justice Holmes and legal realists carried the day, making public policy analysis an ordinary part of the adjudication process. The story, of course, is more complex than this legal version of Don Quixote. Many judges and lawyers, including Justice Holmes in other writings, continued to speak of adjudication in more formalist and positivist terms, with most laypersons in apparent agreement. Judge Burroughs' view of public policy …

Major Contemporary Issues In Extradition Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece Professor Blakesley provides remarks on high crimes in international law, and the ability to extradite state and high government officials for committing them.

The Unimportance Of Precedence In The Law Of Federal Courts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Part I of this Article asserts that the Supreme Court pays little attention to precedent in federal courts law. My examples in support of this claim are taken from important areas of federal courts doctrine, where two major upheavals have taken place in the past thirty years. First, the Warren Court rewrote the law to expand access to federal court. then under Chief Justice Burger, the Court undid many of the changes wrought by its predecessor. The discussion in Part I of prominent departures from precedent is not offered as decisive proof that stare decisis is less important in federal …

The Impact Of Substantive Interests On The Law Of Federal Courts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

The thesis of this Article is that substantive factors exert a powerful and often unrecognized influence over the resolution of jurisdictional issues, and have done so throughout our history. The chief substantive factors at issue are the government's interest iin regulating behavior on the one hand, and the individual's interest in enforcing constitutional restraints upon government on the other. Part I of this Article examines the relationship between jurisdictional rules and substantive consequences, Part II describes the Court's conventional account of federal courts doctrine in terms of jurisdictional policy and institutional roles, and Part III shows that the reasons set …

To Defer Or Not To Defer: A Study Of Federal Circuit Court Deference To District Court Rulings On State Law, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Federal courts of appeals often grant special deference to district court rulings on matters of state law. This practice is important. It is also ill-conceived. This Article explores this "rule of deference." Section I considers the roots and reach of the rule. Together with the Appendices to this Article, it seeks to detail for practitioners, commentators, and judges the way the rule operates in the courts. The remaining sections of this Article consider the wisdom of the rule of deference. Section II argues that the rule lacks a sound rationale and Section III urges that the rule has bad effects …

Is Disparity A Problem?, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Part I describes aspects of the historical and doctrinal background of judicial federalism. Part II examines the Court's treatment of the parity issue and shows how the Court's ambiguity permits both sides of the debate to avoid revealing their true objectives. Part III demonstrates that some, but not all, of the allocation doctrine can be explained in terms of a conflict between the plaintiff's litigating interest and the state's interest in maintaining the integrity of the state judicial process. A significant body of cases, however, does not fall within this framework. In these cases the Court seems to prefer state …

A Distorted Mirror: The Supreme Court's Shimmering View Of Summary Judgment, Directed Verdict, And The Value Of Adjudication, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

As almost anyone alive during the past decade knows, this is the era of the ‘litigation explosion,’ or there is at least the perception that a litigation explosion exists. Although all agree that the absolute number of lawsuits has increased in virtually every corner of the state and federal court systems, there exists vigorous debate about whether the increase is unusual in relative or historical terms and even more vigorous debate about whether the absolute increase in cases symbolizes the American concern for fairness and justice or represents a surge in frivolous or trivial disputes needlessly clogging the courts. As …

Rehnquist, Recusal, And Reform, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

In September 1986, the Senate confirmed William H. Rehnquist as Chief Justice of the United States by a vote of 66 to 33, an unusually close vote for a successful Supreme Court nominee. Although Justice Rehnquist’s elevation from Associate to Chief Justice engendered substantial criticism because of his judicial philosophy, past political activity, and possible views on race relations, the most serious threat to his nomination arose from his decision fifteen years earlier to sit and cast the deciding vote in a Supreme Court case in which many questioned both his impartiality and his candor. That Justice Rehnquist's role in …

Terrorism And The Constitution, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

How do terrorism and the Iran-Contra hearings relate to the Constitution? My thesis is that there is a tendency for the executive of this or any nation to eschew even constitutionally mandated avenues of problem solving considered to be cumbersome, inefficient, or inimical to the executive’s vision of the national interest in foreign affairs. There is also a tendency to consider one’s own conduct and the conduct of one’s allies and friends to be justified when it is directed at goals deemed by the executive branch to be good. Constitutional provisions based on the checks and balances and separation of …

The Evisceration Of The Political Offense Exception To Extradition, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

The Supplementary Convention to the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of American and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, was signed on June 25, 1985, and transmitted to the U.S. Senate on July 17, 1985. This article will focus on the portion of the supplementary treaty which effectively eliminates the political offense exception, and on the statement made by the Legal Adviser to the Department of State, the honorable Judge Abraham D. Sofaer, made in favor of the Supplementary Treaty, on August 1, 1985. This article suggests that approval of …