Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Judges (71)
- Constitutional Law (39)
- State and Local Government Law (36)
- Criminal Law (35)
- Criminal Procedure (29)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (28)
- Legislation (26)
- Jurisprudence (23)
- Jurisdiction (18)
- Litigation (18)
- Civil Procedure (17)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (16)
- Law and Politics (13)
- Legal History (12)
- Administrative Law (11)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (11)
- Election Law (11)
- Evidence (11)
- International Law (11)
- Human Rights Law (10)
- Intellectual Property Law (10)
- Law and Society (10)
- Health Law and Policy (8)
- Military, War, and Peace (8)
- Business Organizations Law (7)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (6)
- International Humanitarian Law (6)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (6)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (30)
- UIC School of Law (19)
- University of Richmond (17)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (14)
- William & Mary Law School (13)
-
- Duke Law (10)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (10)
- University of the District of Columbia School of Law (9)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (9)
- Brigham Young University Law School (8)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (7)
- American University Washington College of Law (6)
- Georgetown University Law Center (6)
- New York Law School (6)
- University of Colorado Law School (6)
- Columbia Law School (5)
- Cornell University Law School (5)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (5)
- University of Georgia School of Law (5)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (4)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (4)
- Cleveland State University (3)
- Notre Dame Law School (3)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (3)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
- University of Baltimore Law (3)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (3)
- Washington University in St. Louis (3)
- West Virginia University (3)
- Western Kentucky University (3)
- Keyword
-
- Courts (23)
- United States Supreme Court (15)
- Judges (12)
- Judicial review (10)
- Congress (9)
-
- Federal courts (9)
- Supreme Court (8)
- History (6)
- Citizenship (5)
- Civil rights (5)
- Constitution (5)
- Judicial selection (5)
- Legislative drafting (5)
- Litigation (5)
- McCain (John) (5)
- Natural born citizens (5)
- Panama Canal Zone (5)
- Statutory interpretation (5)
- Administrative law (4)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (4)
- International Criminal Court (4)
- Judicial process (4)
- Jurisdiction (4)
- Jury reform (4)
- Kentucky (4)
- State courts (4)
- Trials (4)
- United States (4)
- Appellate courts (3)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (21)
- Faculty Publications (18)
- UIC Law Review (16)
- Articles (13)
- University of Richmond Law Review (13)
-
- Michigan Law Review (9)
- University of the District of Columbia Law Review (9)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (8)
- Scholarly Works (8)
- Faculty Articles (7)
- All Faculty Scholarship (6)
- Publications (6)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (6)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (6)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Indiana Law Journal (5)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (5)
- Oklahoma Law Review (5)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (5)
- Law Faculty Publications (4)
- BYU Law Review (3)
- Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law (3)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (3)
- Correspondence (3)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (3)
- Journal Articles (3)
- Manuscript Collection Finding Aids (3)
- NULR Online (3)
- Popular Media (3)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (3)
- Publication Type
Articles 241 - 267 of 267
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Competent Capital Representation: The Necessity Of Knowing And Heeding What Jurors Tell Us About Mitigation, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Scott E. Sundby
Competent Capital Representation: The Necessity Of Knowing And Heeding What Jurors Tell Us About Mitigation, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Scott E. Sundby
Articles
No abstract provided.
Bernard S. Meyer Et Al., The History Of The New York Court Of Appeals, 1932-2003, Meredith R. Miller
Bernard S. Meyer Et Al., The History Of The New York Court Of Appeals, 1932-2003, Meredith R. Miller
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
A Picture Of The New York Court Of Appeals At The Time Of Wood V. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon, Meredith R. Miller
A Picture Of The New York Court Of Appeals At The Time Of Wood V. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon, Meredith R. Miller
Scholarly Works
Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon is an enduring part of the Contracts canon. A symposium addressing the legacy of the case would be incomplete without a picture of the New York Court of Appeals at the time the case was decided and a discussion of the oft-neglected role that court rules and administration play in the development of the law. Thus, it is the aim of this short essay to place Wood in the context of the Court's history, and to explore how structural and jurisdictional changes to the Court could have had an impact on how the case was …
National Juries For National Cases: Preserving Citizen Participation In Large-Scale Litigation, Laura Dooley
National Juries For National Cases: Preserving Citizen Participation In Large-Scale Litigation, Laura Dooley
Scholarly Works
Procedural evolution in complex litigation seems to have left the civil jury behind. Reliance on aggregating devices, such as multidistrict litigation and class actions, as well as settlement pressure created by “bellwether” cases, has resulted in cases of national scope being tried by local juries. Local juries thus have the potential to impose their values on the rest of the country. This trend motivates parties to forum-shop, and some commentators suggest eliminating jury trials in complex cases altogether. Yet the jury is at the heart of our uniquely American understanding of civil justice, and the Seventh Amendment mandates its use …
A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow
A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow
Michigan Law Review
In Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 1941, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of realignment, requiring federal courts to examine the issues in dispute and realign each party as plaintiff or defendant if necessary. Due to the complete diversity requirement, realignment gave the federal courts the ability to both create and destroy diversity jurisdiction. Since 1941, the federal courts have struggled to interpret the central holding in Indianapolis, and have created several competing "tests" for realignment. This confusion has made the doctrine of realignment unworkable. Realignment along with each of the present tests-encourages jurisdictional abuses by forcing the federal …
Natural Justice: A Case For Uniform Rigour, Siyuan Chen, Lionel Leo
Natural Justice: A Case For Uniform Rigour, Siyuan Chen, Lionel Leo
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
This note considers if there is a discernible framework in which courts resolve alleged claims of breaches of natural justice. On the one hand, once it has been ascertained that the rules of natural justice apply, the court will look at all the circumstances of the case to determine if there has been any u nfairness. On the other hand, it has been suggested th even assuming the rules of natural justice apply, there can be varying degrees of rigour in which they are enforced, a sliding scale of sorts.
Scrutiny Land, Randy E. Barnett
Scrutiny Land, Randy E. Barnett
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Scrutiny Land is the place where government needs to justify to a court its restrictions on the liberties of the people. In the 1930s, the Supreme Court began limiting access to Scrutiny Land. While the New Deal Court merely shifted the burden to those challenging a law to show that a restriction of liberty is irrational, the Warren Court made the presumption of constitutionality effectively irrebuttable. After this, only one road to Scrutiny Land remained: showing that the liberty being restricted was a fundamental right. The Glucksberg Two-Step, however, limited the doctrine of fundamental rights to those (1) narrowly defined …
Does Doj's Privilege Waiver Policy Threaten The Rationales Underlying The Attorney-Client Privilege And Work Product Doctrine? A Preliminary "No", Julie R. O'Sullivan
Does Doj's Privilege Waiver Policy Threaten The Rationales Underlying The Attorney-Client Privilege And Work Product Doctrine? A Preliminary "No", Julie R. O'Sullivan
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
According to white-collar defense practitioners, the demise of the corporate attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine is imminent. While a variety of assaults have been identified, by far the most oft-cited culprit is the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), whose prosecutors, it is charged, have routinely insisted that corporations waive these protections to secure cooperation credit and declination of criminal action against the corporate actor and/or consideration at sentencing. DOJ has, by and large, vigorously defended its policies in this regard. Congress now threatens to inject itself into the debate: legislation entitled the "Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act" has been introduced …
Climate Change In The Supreme Court, Lisa Heinzerling
Climate Change In The Supreme Court, Lisa Heinzerling
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court confronted the issue of climate change for the first time. The Court held that the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate greenhouse gases and that the agency may not decline to exercise this authority based either on factors not present in the statute or inconclusive gestures toward uncertainty in the science of climate change. I had the privilege of serving as the lead author of the winning briefs in this case. This Article provides an insider's perspective on the choices that went into bringing and …
The Virtue Of Judicial Statesmanship, Neil S. Siegel
The Virtue Of Judicial Statesmanship, Neil S. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
Some of America’s most important judges have emphasized or embodied the practice of judicial statesmanship. Yet from the examples they set, it is not particularly clear what judicial statesmanship is or why it matters. In this Article, I conceptualize the elusive phenomenon of judicial statesmanship, and I defend statesmanship as a core, if underappreciated, dimension of judicial role. I argue that judicial statesmanship defines a virtue in the role of a judge. Statesmanship charges judges with approaching cases so as to facilitate the capacity of the legal system to legitimate itself—over the long run and with respect to the nation …
Voices Of American Law: Us Supreme Court Cases Meet The 21st Century, Lauren M. Collins
Voices Of American Law: Us Supreme Court Cases Meet The 21st Century, Lauren M. Collins
Faculty Scholarship
reviewing Voices of American Law documentary series(Thomas B. Metzloff & Sarah Wood producers)
The Verdict On Juries, Neil Vidmar, Valerie P. Hans
The Verdict On Juries, Neil Vidmar, Valerie P. Hans
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Which States Have The Best (And Worst) High Courts?, Mitu Gulati, Stephen J. Choi, Eric A. Posner
Which States Have The Best (And Worst) High Courts?, Mitu Gulati, Stephen J. Choi, Eric A. Posner
Faculty Scholarship
This paper ranks the high courts of the fifty states, based on their performance during the years 1998-2000, along three dimensions: opinion quality (or influence as measured by out-of-state citations), independence (or non-partisanship), and productivity (opinions written). We also discuss ways of aggregating these measures. California and Delaware had the most influential courts; Georgia and Mississippi had the most productive courts; and Rhode Island and New York had the most independent courts. If equal weight is given to each measure, then the top five states were: California, Arkansas, North Dakota, Montana, and Ohio. We compare our approach and results with …
Preemption And Federal Common Law, Ernest A. Young
Preemption And Federal Common Law, Ernest A. Young
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Nothing But The Truth? Experiments On Adversarial Competition, Expert Testimony, And Decision Making, Cheryl Boudreau, Mathew D. Mccubbins
Nothing But The Truth? Experiments On Adversarial Competition, Expert Testimony, And Decision Making, Cheryl Boudreau, Mathew D. Mccubbins
Faculty Scholarship
Many scholars debate whether a competition between experts in legal, political, or economic contexts elicits truthful information and, in turn, enables people to make informed decisions. Thus, we analyze experimentally the conditions under which competition between experts induces the experts to make truthful statements and enables jurors listening to these statements to improve their decisions. Our results demonstrate that, contrary to game theoretic predictions and contrary to critics of our adversarial legal system, competition induces enough truth telling to allow jurors to improve their decisions. Then, when we impose additional institutions (such as penalties for lying or the threat of …
Administrative Law Agonistes, Mathew D. Mccubbins, Roger Noll, Barry R. Weingast, Daniel B. Rodriguez
Administrative Law Agonistes, Mathew D. Mccubbins, Roger Noll, Barry R. Weingast, Daniel B. Rodriguez
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Prosecution Of Process Crimes: Thoughts And Trends, Allison Caffarone, Karen Patton Seymour, Stephen R. Peikin
Prosecution Of Process Crimes: Thoughts And Trends, Allison Caffarone, Karen Patton Seymour, Stephen R. Peikin
Scholarly Works
The United States Department of Justice has come under attack in recent years because of its increased attention to, and prosecution of, crimes committed during the course of its investigations — obstruction of justice, perjury, and making false statements. These crimes have been labeled “cover-up” or “process crimes,” and the charging prosecutors have been criticized as bringing such charges only against high-profile defendants as to whom there is insufficient evidence to charge the “more serious” underlying offenses that prompted the initial investigation. Some critics have gone so far as to label these prosecutions “vindictive.” Much of this criticism is misplaced. …
What Do We Have Against Parents?: An Assessment Of Judicial Bypass Procedures And Parental Involvement In Abortions By Minors, Wade Schueneman
What Do We Have Against Parents?: An Assessment Of Judicial Bypass Procedures And Parental Involvement In Abortions By Minors, Wade Schueneman
Georgia Law Review
It is the established law of the land that minors enjoy a limited right to terminate unwanted pregnancies. States may restrain the exercise of this right by requiring parental consent or notification, but they must allow minors an opportunity to bypass consent requirements. This Note examines the history and present state of judicial and nonjudicial bypass mechanisms. It details the constraints and requirements imposed by state and federal constitutions, assesses the current landscape of parental involvement statutes, and provides prescriptive analysis as to how states might choose to refine and improve their bypass mechanisms to better protect parental rights.
Imagining Gun Control In America: Understanding The Remainder Problem Article And Essay, Nicholas J. Johnson
Imagining Gun Control In America: Understanding The Remainder Problem Article And Essay, Nicholas J. Johnson
Faculty Scholarship
Gun control in the United States generally has meant some type of supply regulation. Supply restrictions ranging from one-gun-a-month schemes to flat gun bans cannot work without a willingness and ability to reduce total inventory to levels approaching zero ("the supply-side ideal"). This is an impossible feat in a country that already has 300 million guns tightly held by people who think they are uniquely important tools. The average defiance ratio in places that have attempted gun confiscation and registration is 2.6 illegal guns for every legal one. In many countries defiance is far higher. None of those countries has …
The Virginia Judicial System: Organization And Structure, W. Clark Williams Jr.
The Virginia Judicial System: Organization And Structure, W. Clark Williams Jr.
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Virginia Law: It’S Online, But Should You Use It?, Timothy L. Coggins
Virginia Law: It’S Online, But Should You Use It?, Timothy L. Coggins
Law Faculty Publications
A judge asks you to present her with a copy of the Virginia Code section you are referencing in court, or she asks you to provide a copy of the Supreme Court of Virginia opinion you cited. You used Virginia state government websites to find both the code section and the court opinion. This is easy, right? You give her the copy of what you found online. But could there be a problem? Is the court opinion that you retrieved from the court website considered an official version of the court opinion? Has the Virginia Code section that you provided …
Congress's Power To Block Enforcement Of Federal Court Orders, Jennifer Mason Mcaward
Congress's Power To Block Enforcement Of Federal Court Orders, Jennifer Mason Mcaward
Journal Articles
This Article considers the constitutionality and propriety of recent appropriations riders passed by the House of Representatives in response to controversial federal court rulings. The riders prohibit the use of any federal funds for the enforcement of court orders issued in specified cases. These enforcement-blocking provisions raise significant separation-of-powers concerns as between Congress and both coordinate branches of the federal government.
The Article begins by looking at the controversial First Amendment rulings that triggered the enforcement-blocking riders, and the Congressional debates over the proper way to respond to the rulings. The riders are not merely symbolic protests, but could have …
No Two-Stepping In The Laboratories: State Deference Standards And Their Implications For Improving The Chevron Doctrine, Michael Pappas
No Two-Stepping In The Laboratories: State Deference Standards And Their Implications For Improving The Chevron Doctrine, Michael Pappas
Publications
No abstract provided.
Cooper's Quiet Demise (A Short Response To Professor Strauss), Frederic M. Bloom
Cooper's Quiet Demise (A Short Response To Professor Strauss), Frederic M. Bloom
Publications
No abstract provided.
The Accounting: Habeas Corpus And Enemy Combatants, Emily Calhoun
The Accounting: Habeas Corpus And Enemy Combatants, Emily Calhoun
Publications
The judiciary should impose a heavy burden of justification on the executive when a habeas petitioner challenges the accuracy of facts on which an enemy combatant designation rests. A heavy burden of justification will ensure that the essential institutional purposes of the writ--and legitimate, separated-powers government--are preserved, even during times of national exigency. The institutional purposes of the writ argue for robust judicial review rather than deference to the executive. Moreover, the procedural flexibility traditionally associated with the writ gives the judiciary the tools to ensure that a heavy burden of justification can be imposed.
Delivering User-Centric Services At The Colorado Supreme Court Library, Robert M. Linz
Delivering User-Centric Services At The Colorado Supreme Court Library, Robert M. Linz
Publications
No abstract provided.