Courts Commons^™

Unconstitutional Courses, Frederic M. Bloom

Publications

By now, we almost expect Congress to fail. Nearly every time the federal courts announce a controversial decision, Congress issues a call to rein in "runaway" federal judges. And nearly every time Congress makes a "jurisdiction-stripping" threat, it comes to nothing.

But if Congress's threats possess little fire, we have still been distracted by their smoke. This Article argues that Congress's noisy calls have obscured another potent threat to the "judicial Power": the Supreme Court itself. On occasion, this Article asserts, the Court reshapes and abuses the "judicial Power"--not through bold pronouncements or obvious doctrinal revisions, but through something more …

A Great Writ Reduced: Why The Tenth Circuit’S Interpretation Of Congressional Intent And Supreme Court Precedent Portends Defeat For State Prisoners Seeking Federal Habeas Corpus Relief, Elizabeth J. Barnett

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Primer On The Doctrine Of Federal Sovereign Immunity, Gregory C. Sisk

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legislating New Federalism: The Call For Grand Jury Reform In The States, John F. Decker

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court, Democracy And Institutional Reform Litigation, Ross Sandler, David Schoenbrod

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Availability Or Practical Obscurity: The Debate Over Public Access To Court Records On The Internet, Arminda Bradford Bepko

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Academics And The Federal Circuit: Is There A Gulf And How Do We Bridge It?, John R. Thomas

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Many of the great research universities of the United States enjoy a close relationship with innovators. Names like Carnegie, Cornell, Hopkins, Stanford, and Vanderbilt bring to mind not so much these men, but the academic institutions that they founded. The mention of other research institutions, such as the Universities of Chicago and Virginia, allows us to recall entrepreneurial founders such as Rockefeller and Jefferson. It is appropriate then, to consider how university research - and in particular, the work product of the law schools - is faring before that court whose rulings most directly impact American innovation policy.

Schiavo And Klein (Symposium), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

When teaching federal courts, I sometimes find that students are slow to care about legal issues that initially seem picayune, hyper-technical, and unrelated to real-world concerns. It takes hard work to engage students in discussion of United States v. Klein,1 notwithstanding its apparent articulation of a foundational separation of powers principle that Congress may not dictate a "rule of decision" governing a case in federal court. A Civil War-era decision about the distribution of war spoils, one the Supreme Court has hardly ever cited since and then only to distinguish it, in cases involving takings and spotted owls? Yawn.

Gates V. Cook: Are Courts Equipped To Manage Prisons?, Katherine T. Wainwright

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

Juror Bias Is A Special Problem In High-Profile Trials, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Scott Peterson's jury convicted him and sentenced him to death. Whether he had a fair jury is a question that the appellate courts will confront as they review Peterson's appeal of his conviction and sentence. Would the jury have reached the same decisions if the case had not been so extensively covered in the media? Or was Scott Peterson condemned by media publicity? Whatever your verdict, the Peterson trial provides yet another example of the hurdles to fair trials in high-profile cases.

Improving The Appellate Process Worldwide Through Maximizing Judicial Resources, Honorable J. Clifford Wallace

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

As the number of cases filed each year has surged, U.S. federal appellate courts have evolved in order to fulfill their core functions of deciding appeals and setting guiding precedent. Many of the challenges created by overwhelming caseloads are also being tackled in foreign judicial systems. In this Article, Judge Wallace offers the approach of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit as a possible model of reform, although he also points out that each judiciary will need to tailor reform efforts to its particular circumstances. In Part II, Judge Wallace details several of the case management …

In (Slightly Uncomfortable) Defense Of ‘Triage’ By Public Defenders, John B. Mitchell

Faculty Articles

This article argues that triaging is necessary for public defenders and is a response to the work of Professor Freedman. Because states lack money in areas of greater community concern, the defense of indigent criminals is neglected and substantial resources are not likely to be forthcoming. The author previously set out a solution of triaging, which can be conducted either haphazardly or according to some set of rational principles based on ethical theory. The author concurs with Professor Freedman to the extent that the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington effectively ensures that Sixth Amendment Constitutional guarantees will …

Interim Measures In International Human Rights: Evolution And Harmonization, Jo M. Pasqualucci

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In this Article, the Author undertakes a comprehensive study of interim measures ordered in human rights cases before six international enforcement bodies--the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the United Nations Committee against Torture, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. An order of interim measures may require that the State take positive action, such as providing protection for human rights activists or journalists, or it may call upon the State to refrain from taking action, such as not extraditing a person or delaying …

Law And War: Individual Rights, Executive Authority, And Judicial Power In England During World War I, Rachel Vorspan

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In this-Article Professor Vorspan examines the role of the English courts during World War I, particularly the judicial response to executive infringements on individual liberty. Focusing on detention, deportation, conscription, and confiscation of property, the Author revises the conventional depiction of the English judiciary during World War I as passive and peripheral. She argues that in four ways the judges were activist and energetic, both in advancing the government's war effort and in promoting their own policies and powers. First, they were judicial warriors, developing innovative legal strategies to legitimize detention and other governmental restrictions on personal freedom. Second, they …

Congress's Power To Enforce Fourteenth Amendment Rights: Lessons From Federal Remedies The Framers Enacted , Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Robert Kaczorowski argues for an expansive originalist interpretation of Congressional power under the Fourteenth Amendment. Before the Civil War Congress actually exercised, and the Supreme Court repeatedly upheld plenary Congressional power to enforce the constitutional rights of slaveholders. After the Civil War, the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment copied the antebellum statutes and exercised plenary power to enforce the constitutional rights of all American citizens when they enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and then incorporated the Act into the Fourteenth Amendment. The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment thereby exercised the plenary power the Rehnquist Court claims the …

Judicial Review Before Marbury, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

While scholars have long probed the original understanding of judicial review and the early judicial review case law, this article presents a study of the judicial review case law in the United States before Marbury v. Madison that is dramatically more complete than prior work and that challenges previous scholarship on the original understanding of judicial review on the two most critical dimensions: how well judicial review was established at the time of the Founding and when it was exercised. Where prior work argues that judicial review was rarely exercised before Marbury (or that it was created in Marbury), …

Foreign Judgments At Common Law: Rethinking The Enforcement Rules, Tanya J. Monestier

Journal Articles

England and Canada have adopted divergent approaches to the enforcement of foreign civil and commercial judgments. An English court will only enforce a foreign judgment where the defendant submitted to the junsdiction of the foreign court, or was present in the foreign jurisdiction when served with process. This position. while protecting domestic defendants, is outdated and does little to further the objectives underpinning judgment enforcement- Canadian courts, by contrast, have been far more liberal than their English counterparts, enforcing foreign judgments in cases where there is a "real and substantial connection" between the dispute and the judgment forum. While this …

The Writ Of Habeas Corpus And The Special Court For Sierra Leone: Addressing An Unforeseen Problem In The Establishment Of A Hybrid Court, Anthony O'Rourke

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Crawford V. Washington: Encouraging And Ensuring The Confrontation Of Witness, Robert P. Mosteller

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Representing Children In Families, Bruce A. Green, Annette R. Appell

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Should Parents Be Allowed To Record A Child's Telephone Conversations When They Believe The Child Is In Danger?: An Examination Ofthe Federal Wiretap Statute And The Doctrine Of Vicarious Consent In The Context Of A Criminal Prosecution, Daniel R. Dinger

Seattle University Law Review

This Article addresses the little-used but important doctrine of vicarious consent; in particular, the Article argues that the doctrine should be more widely accepted by the criminal courts. Part II gives a brief overview of the federal wiretap statute, its state law counterparts, and the doctrine of vicarious consent that has emerged as courts have interpreted federal and state wiretap legislation. Part III addresses the doctrine's viability and, as referenced above, argues that it should be accepted by the criminal courts. Specifically, Part III argues that when a parent records a child's telephone conversations with a third party out of …

The Contractual Basis Of The Enforcement Of Exclusive And Non-Exclusive Choice Of Court Agreements, Tiong Min Yeo

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

This article argues that, although choice of court agreements can be viewed from a procedural or contractual perspective, the predominant approach in Singapore and English law in respect of the exclusive jurisdiction agreement has been to give primacy to the rationale of the enforcement of a contractual bargain, tempered by a judicial discretion in its enforcement within the procedural jurisdictional context. It is also argued that the only difference between exclusive and non-exclusive jurisdiction agreements lies in the content and scope of the agreement between the parties, so the same contractual approach (as tempered by procedural considerations) should be applied …

The Terminator As Eraser: How Arnold Schwarzenegger Used The Right Of Publicity To Terminate Non-Defamatory Political Speech, David Welkowitz, Tyler Ochoa

Faculty Publications

INTRODUCTION

While it is no longer unusual for a politician to have been a recent celebrity in the commercial world of entertainment, the Schwarzenegger bobblehead case is one of the rare cases in which a politician has filed a lawsuit asserting a right of publicity claim. However, the Schwarzenegger case and its settlement exposed some basic flaws in the analysis of celebrity rights problems, flaws that are not unique to its political context. Two of those flaws converged in this case and are the main subjects of this article. First, rights of publicity claims frequently are used as a "stealth" …

Take What You Can, Give Nothing Back: Judicial Estoppel, Employment Discrimination, Bankruptcy, And Piracy In The Courts, Theresa M. Beiner, Robert B. Chapman

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Statutory Stare Decisis In The Courts Of Appeals, Amy Coney Barrett

Journal Articles

The Supreme Court has long given its cases interpreting statutes special protection from overruling. Two rationales exist for this practice. One line of thought interprets congressional silence following the Supreme Court's interpretation of a statute as approval of that interpretation. According to this way of thinking, a refusal to overrule statutory precedent is a refusal to veer from an interpretation that Congress has effectively approved. Another line of thought emphasizes that statutory interpretation inevitably involves policymaking, and that policymaking is an aspect of legislative, rather than judicial, power. According to this second way of thinking, the Supreme Court should refuse …

Enlisting The U.S. Courts In A New Front, Debra M. Strauss

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The time has come to extend the national approach that has been used successfully to dismantle the infrastructure of hate groups to the international realm against terrorist groups. The foundation of this approach is a private right to a cause of action apart from any military or diplomatic efforts by the government. In this Article, Professor Strauss analyzes case precedents under several federal statutes--the Antiterrorism Act of 1991, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, the Torture Victim Protection Act, the Alien Tort Claim Act--as well as state common-law tort claims, including aiding and abetting liability. Professor Strauss …

State Courts And The Making Of Federal Common Law, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

The authority of federal courts to make federal common law has been a controversial question for courts and scholars. Several scholars have propounded theories addressing primarily whether and when federal courts are justified in making federal common law. It is a little-noticed phenomenon that state courts, too, make federal common law. This Article brings to light the fact that state courts routinely make federal common law in as real a sense as federal courts make it. It further explains that theories that focus on whether the making of federal common law by federal courts is justified are inadequate to explain …

The Surge In Immigration Appeals And Its Impact On The Second Circuit Court Of Appeals, Michael B. Mushlin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In this report we (1) describe the BIA procedural reforms; (2) quantify the resulting increase in appeals from the BIA to the circuit courts of appeals with particular emphasis on the Second Circuit; (3) review the constitutional challenges to the BIA reforms, which have been uniformly rejected; (4) describe the administrative response of the Second Circuit to the BIA appeal surge; (5) assess the impact of the surge on the Second Circuit, and its other ramifications; and (6) offer our recommendations on how to deal with the surge going forward.

Constitutionalization, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Students of constitutional law tend to suspect pretty early on that the Constitution simply means whatever the Supreme Court says that it means. Rather than fight that intuition, I think it is best to treat the student insight as one of the basic starting assumptions when teaching a course in Constitutional Law. The goal then becomes to help students figure out how best to maneuver and feel comfortable in a legal universe where the Constitution has only contingent meaning.

What the Supreme Court does when it clothes its political policy preferences in the garb of constitutional law can be described …

The Futility Of Appeal: Disciplinary Insights Into The "Affirmance Effect" On The United States Courts Of Appeals, Chris Wright Guthrie, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In contrast to the Supreme Court, which typically reverses the cases it hears, the United States Courts of Appeals almost always affirm the cases that they hear. We set out to explore this affirmance effect on the U.S. Courts of Appeal by using insights drawn from law and economics (i.e., selection theory), political science (i.e., attitudinal theory and new institutionalism), and cognitive psychology (i.e., heuristics and biases, including the status quo and omission biases).