Courts Commons^™

A Conversation With The Experts: The Future Of Problem-Solving Courts

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

No abstract provided.

Communication Indecency: Why The Communications Decency Act, And The Judicial Interpretation Of It, Has Led To A Lawless Internet In The Area Of Defamation, Colby Ferris

Barry Law Review

First, this article explores how law of defamation has been applied in the brick and mortar world, and how those same principles were applied to the cyber world. Next it looks at Congress’s legislation of defamation law on the Internet, and how that legislation has been applied in court. Finally, it evaluates the changing attitude toward that legislation, and changes Congress should consider making.

The Future Of Problem-Solving Courts: Inside The Courts And Beyond, Stacy Lee Burns

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

No abstract provided.

All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee

College of Law - Faculty Scholarship

This paper contains the introduction to the new book, All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies and the Rule of Law (Stanford University Press, 2010).

The book begins with the observation that Americans are divided in their beliefs about whether courts operate on the basis of unbiased legal principle or of political interest. This division in public opinion in turn breeds suspicion that judges do not actually mean what they say, that judicial professions of impartiality are just fig leaves used to hide the pursuit of partisan purposes.

Comparing law to the practice of common courtesy, the …

Hearings, Mark Spottswood

Faculty Working Papers

This article explores a constantly recurring procedural question: When is fact-finding improved by a live hearing, and when would it be better to rely on a written record? Unfortunately, when judges, lawyers, and rulemakers consider this issue, they are led astray by the widely shared—but false—assumption that a judge can best determine issues of credibility by viewing the demeanor of witnesses while they are testifying. In fact, a large body of scientific evidence indicates that judges are more likely to be deceived by lying or mistaken witnesses when observing their testimony in person than if the judges were to review …

Federal Circuit Patent Precedent: An Empirical Study Of Institutional Authority And Ip Ideology, David Pekarek-Krohn, Emerson H. Tiller

Faculty Working Papers

In this paper, we aim to better understand the institutional authority of the Federal Circuit as a source of law as well as the influence of pro-patent and anti-patent ideological forces at play between the Supreme Court, Federal Circuit, and the district courts. Our specific focus is on the district courts and how they cite Federal Circuit precedent relative to Supreme Court precedent to support their decisions, whether they be pro-patent or anti-patent. Using a variety of citation approaches and statistical tests, we find that federal district courts treat the Federal Circuit as more authoritative (compared to the Supreme Court) …

The Macroeconomic Court: Rhetoric And Implications Of New Deal Decision-Making, Nancy Staudt, Yilei He

Faculty Working Papers

Supreme Court scholars have long discussed and debated the dramatic shift in constitutional decision-making that took place in the late 1930s—a shift that led the Justices to presume the constitutionality of any and all commercial statutes no matter how "preposterous" they might seem. The conventional wisdom holds that the Supreme Court altered its decision-making calculus to avoid the consequences of President Roosevelt's "court-packing plan," but various other explanations have also emerged in the literature over time. In this Article, Professor Staudt and Ms. He investigate an explanation that scholars and commentators have largely ignored: the role of the economy itself. …

Methodological Advances And Empirical Legal Scholarship: A Note On The Cox And Miles' Voting Rights Act Study, Nancy Staudt, Tyler Vanderweele

Faculty Working Papers

In this Response, we use Professors Cox and Miles' recent study of judicial decision-making to explore what is at stake when legal scholars present empirical findings without fully investigating the structural relationships of their data or without explicitly stating the assumptions being made to draw causal inferences. We then introduce a new methodology that is intuitive, easy to use, and, most importantly, allows scholars systematically to assess problems of bias and confounding. This methodology—known as causal directed acyclic graphs—will help empirical researchers to identify true cause and effect relationships when they exist and, at the same time, posit statistical models …

Economic Trends And Judicial Outcomes: A Macrotheory Of The Court, Thomas Brennan, Lee Epstein, Nancy Staudt

Faculty Working Papers

In this symposium essay, we investigate the effect of economic conditions on the voting behavior of U.S. Supreme Court Justices. We theorize that Justices are akin to voters in political elections; specifically, we posit that the Justices will view short-term and relatively minor economic downturns—recessions—as attributable to the failures of elected officials, but will consider long-term and extreme economic contractions—depressions—as the result of exogenous shocks largely beyond the control of the government. Accordingly, we predict two patterns of behavior in economic-related cases that come before the Court: (1) in typical times, when the economy cycles through both recessionary and prosperous …

"Controlling" Securities Fraud: Proposed Liability Standards For Controlling Persons Under The 1933 And 1934 Securities Acts, Nancy Staudt

Faculty Working Papers

This Student Note investigates the history and intent underlying the controlling person liability provisions of the 1933 and 1934 Securities Act. It notes that courts have adopted a ranges of standards for holding controlling persons liability, but whichever standard is chosen--that standard is applied to both Acts. This note argues that courts should impose unique liability standards for each statute in order to fully realize Congress' purpose in adopting the laws.

The Ultimate Injustice: When A Court Misstates The Facts, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

This essay deals with what "the law" did to Dr. Branion, an American citizen, after the jury convicted him of murder in 1968. Under the American legal system, a defendant is entitled to have his case reviewed by a higher court, and, under certain circumstances, if the appellate review is unsuccessful, to present a petition for habeas corpus to a state or federal court. I will focus primarily on the stage of his litigation with which I am most familiar: his pursuit of a habeas remedy in federal court between 1986 and 1989. I will try to explain how one …

International Human Rights At The Close Of The Twentieth Century, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Speculates as to why the human-rights revolution is increasingly likely to dominate our foreign-policy attentions in the decades to come. Ventures some predictions, of particular interest perhaps to international lawyers, about where the cause of international human rights is heading.

Pragmatic Indeterminacy, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

If, as a result of taking Indeterminacy seriously, we revolutionize the way we teach law and the way we select judges, then we will also revolutionize the way cases are litigated (because the new judges will expect to hear a different kind of argumentation) and the way people order their lives in anticipation of the way their disputes will be decided by these new judges.

The Coerciveness Of International Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

This article shows that an important part of the deep structure of international law is its self-referential strategy of employing its own rules to protect its rules. International law tolerates a principled violation of its own rules when necessary to keep other rules from being broken. It extends a legal privilege to states to use coercion against any state that has selfishly attempted to transgress its international obligations. International law thus protects itself through the opportunistic deployment of its own rules.

The Concept Of Special Custom In International Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

General customary international law contains rules, norms, and principles that seem applicable to any state and not to a particular state or an exclusive grouping of states. For example, norms relating to the high seas, to airspace and outer space, to diplomatic immunities, to the rules of warfare, and so forth, apply equally to all states having occasion to be concerned with these areas. Similarly, the facts of a given case may suggest exclusively the application of general custom—such as cases concerning collision on the high seas between ships of different countries, cases involving general principles of international law, cases …

Collateral Review Of Remand Orders: Reasserting The Supervisory Role Of The Supreme Court, James Pfander

Faculty Working Papers

Although some might consider the appellate review of remand orders as something of a jurisdictional backwater, recent developments suggest that the rules need attention. The Supreme Court has decided no fewer than four cases in the past few years and has failed to develop a persuasive framework. Indeed, one member of the Court, Justice Breyer, has invited "experts" to solve the problem.

In this essay, I suggest that the solution lies in the Court's own hands. Rather than proposing legislative or rulemaking solutions, I call on the Court to re-invigorate its supervisory powers and conduct direct review of district court …

Volume 77 (2009-2010)

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

California Judicial Council's Commission For Impartial Courts, Ronald B. Robie, Richard Fybel, Mary-Beth Moylan

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Should Judges Regulate Lawyers, Eli Wald

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Promoting Public Confidence In The Regulation Of Judicial Conduct: A Survey Of Recent Developments And Practice In Four Common Law Countries, Sarah M. R. Cravens

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights And Federal Courts: Creating A Two-Course Sequence, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism By Alex M Cameron, Dianne Pothier

Dianne Pothier Collection

Alex Cameron’s book, Power Without Law, is a scathing critique of the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1999 decisions in R. v. Marshall upholding Donald Marshall Jr.’s Mi’kmaq treaty claim. Cameron’s book has attracted a lot of attention because of the author’s position as Crown counsel for the government of Nova Scotia. Cameron was not involved as a lawyer in the Marshall case itself. As a fisheries prosecution, Marshall was a matter of federal jurisdiction pursuant to s. 91(12) of the Constitution Act, 1867, 3 and Nova Scotia chose not to intervene. However, Cameron did become involved in a subsequent …

California Judicial Council's "Commission For Impartial Courts", Ronald B. Robie, Richard Fybel, Mary-Beth Moylan

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Pioneers Versus Improvers: Enabling Optimal Patent Claim Scope, Timothy Chen Saulsbury

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Arising most commonly as a defense to an infringement claim, enablement requires a patent to describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail to permit a person having ordinary skill in the relevant field to replicate and use the invention without needing to engage in "undue experimentation." If a patent claim is not "enabled"--i.e., if a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) who studied the patent cannot make or use the invention without undue experimentation--the claim is invalid and can no longer be asserted. This penalty deters patent applicants from claiming more than they invented and allows others to …

The Future Of Problem-Solving Justice: An International Perspective, Greg Berman, Aubrey Fox

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

No abstract provided.

The Exclusionary Rule Applied To Coerced Statements From Nondefendants, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 795 (2010), Victoria D. Noel

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Facilitating Intergovernmental Dialogue: Judicial Review Of The Division Of Powers In The Supreme Court Of Canada, Wade Wright

Law Publications

No abstract provided.

What Exactly Is A "Substantial Constitutional Question" For Purposes Of Appeal To The North Carolina Supreme Court?, Justice Robert Orr

Campbell Law Review

This Article will examine the history of the statutory right of appeal based upon a substantial constitutional question; highlight the interpretation and application of this provision, particularly over the past five years; provide a look at a few of the cases in which the North Carolina Supreme Court has accepted the notice of appeal ("NOA") based upon a substantial constitutional question or instead has dismissed and not retained; and propose an appropriate test for applying this provision and potential statutory amendments that will better define and more uniformly address the question of what constitutes a substantial constitutional question.

Will Cameras In The Courtroom Lead To More Law And Order? A Case For Broadcast Access To Judicial Proceedings, Shelly Rosenfeld

American University Criminal Law Brief

No abstract provided.

No Habeas For You! Al Maqaleh V. Gates, The Bagram Detainees, And The Global Insurgency, Michael J. Buxton

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.