Courts Commons^™

“Islamic Law” In Us Courts: Judicial Jihad Or Constitutional Imperative?, Faisal Kutty

Pepperdine Law Review

At the beginning of 2014, about a dozen states introduced or re-introduced bills to ban the use of Sharī’ah law. They hope to join the seven states that have ostensibly banned it to date. Anti-Sharī’ah advocates have cited a number of cases to back their tenuous claim that Sharī’ah is stealthily sneaking in through the doctrine of comity, but a close examination of the cases they cite contradicts their claim. Comity, when one court defers to the jurisdiction of another, has been accepted and denied based on legal principles and public policy, on a case-by-case basis. There is no creeping …

Conceptions Of Religion In The Secular State: Evolving Turkish Secularism, Seval Yildirim

Pepperdine Law Review

The article focuses on the concepts of religion in secular states such as Republic of Turkey. Topics discussed include distinction between secularism and religion, views of philosopher of liberalism John Locke on delegation of matters of faith to the Church and matters of public good to the state along with the relationship of modernization and secularism.

Foreign And Religious Family Law: Comity, Contract, And The Constitution, Ann Laquer Estin

Pepperdine Law Review

The article focuses on role of the U.S. courts in confronting religious laws in dispute resolution of various cases of domestic relations, contracts, and torts. Topics discussed include role of secular courts in maintaining constitutional balance between the free exercise and establishment clauses, constitutional challenges faced by religious adherents, and importance of legal pluralism in the U.S.

Rethinking The “Religious-Question” Doctrine, Christopher C. Lund

Pepperdine Law Review

The “religious question” doctrine is a well-known and commonly accepted notion about the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses. The general idea is that, in our system of separated church and state, courts do not decide religious questions. And from this premise, many things flow — including the idea that courts must dismiss otherwise justiciable controversies when they would require courts to resolve religious questions. Yet a vexing thought arises. The religious-question doctrine traditionally comes out of a notion that secular courts cannot resolve metaphysical or theological issues. But when one looks at the cases that courts have been dismissing pursuant to …

Religious Tribunals And Secular Courts: Navigating Power And Powerlessness, Michelle Greenberg-Kobrin

Pepperdine Law Review

In this article, the author discusses the ways such as common law, and contracts employed by religious systems for navigating their relationship with legal systems of secular states. Topics discussed include the role of religious contracts in helping religious systems negotiate with secularism, the role of religious contracts in protecting autonomy of religious systems, and the structure of marriage and divorce in Jewish law.

Introduction: Religious Law In The 21st Century, Michael A. Helfand

Pepperdine Law Review

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various articles present in symposium including role of the U.S. courts in interpreting religious laws, practice of religious laws in secular states, and political, and legal structures of Jewish and Islamic identities.

Petitioning Foreign Governments: The Act Of State And Noerr-Pennington Doctrines, Don R. Sampen

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Meet 'Tenth Justice': Solicitor General Verrilli, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Post-Sentencing Appellate Waivers, Kevin Bennardo

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A sentencing appellate waiver is a criminal defendant’s promise not to appeal her sentence. These provisions routinely appear in federal defendants’ plea agreements. With a few narrow exceptions, a knowing and voluntary sentencing appellate waiver bars a defendant from appealing all issues within the waiver’s scope. Using models of judicial behavior and empirical studies, this Article argues that the inclusion of sentencing appellate waivers in plea agreements creates bargaining inefficiencies and removes important incentives from the sentencing process. As a solution, the Article proposes that sentencing appellate waivers should take the form of separate post-sentencing agreements.

The Case For Prosecuting Arms Traffickers In The International Criminal Court, Leigh Rome

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The New Old Legal Realism, Tracey E. George, Mitu Gulati, Ann C. Mcginley

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Diversifying The Federal Bench: Is Universal Legitimacy For The U.S. Justice System Possible?, Nancy Scherer

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Realism About Judges, Richard A. Posner

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law And The Judicial Hierarchy, Pauline T. Kim

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trending@Rwu Law: Professor Jared Goldstein's Post: A Fireside Chat With Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr., Jared Goldstein

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

A New And Old Theory For Adjudicating Standardized Contracts, Eric Mills Holmes, Dagmar Thürmann

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Forum: American Acceptance Of The Jurisdiction Of The International Court Of Justice: Experiences And Prospects, Louis B. Sohn, Dean Rusk, Gabriel M. Wilner

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Chief Justice, The Appointment Of Inferior Officers, And The "Court Of Law" Requirement, James E. Pfander

Northwestern University Law Review

In addition to his judicial duties, the Chief Justice presides over a sprawling judicial bureaucracy. Each year, the Chief fills positions within that bureaucracy, designating Article III judges to various specialty courts and appointing such officers as the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Although critics worry that the Chief may use his appointment role to shape Third Branch policy unduly, scholars view the role as constitutionally benign. This Article questions the Chief’s role. The Constitution authorizes Congress to vest the appointment of inferior officers in the “courts of law” but not the Chief Justice. History teaches …

A Typology Of Judging Styles, Corey Rayburn Yung

Northwestern University Law Review

This Article calls into question the fundamental premises of models of judicial decisionmaking utilized by legal and political science scholars. In the place of the predominant theories, I offer a new approach to understanding judicial behavior which recognizes judicial heterogeneity, multidimensional behavior, and interconnectedness among judges at different levels within the judiciary. The study utilizes a unique dataset of over 30,000 judicial votes from eleven courts of appeals in 2008, yielding statistically independent measures for judicial activism, ideology, independence, and partisanship. Based upon those four metrics, statistical cluster analysis is used to identify nine statistically distinct judging styles: Trailblazing, Consensus …

The Rise Of Judicial Governance In The Supreme Court Of India, Manoj Mate

Journal Articles

This article analyzes how the Supreme Court of India, through its activism and assertiveness, has emerged as arguably the most powerful court among democratic polities. Over the past four and a half decades, the Court dramatically expanded its role in the realm of rights and governance, asserting the power to invalidate constitutional amendments under the basic structure doctrine, control judicial appointments, and govern in the areas of environmental policy, monitoring and investigating government corruption, and promoting electoral transparency and accountability. In this article, I argue that the Court’s shift toward greater, yet selective, assertiveness in India’s governance can most adequately …

Morris V. Allen And The Lost History Of The Anti-Injunction Act Of 1793, James E. Pfander, Nassim Nazemi

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Interest Lawyering & Judicial Politics: Four Cases Worth A Second Look In Williams-Yulee V. The Florida Bar, Ruthann Robson

Publications and Research

This "First Look" Essay argues that the Court should consider public interest lawyering when it decides a First Amendment challenge to the Canon prohibiting judicial candidates from soliciting money in Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar. It suggests that four cases are worth a "second look": Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (2002); Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. (2009); Shelley v. Kraemer (1948); and a Florida Supreme Court case involving discipline of a judge, In re Hawkins.

The Protection Of Conscience: On Aca, Rfra And Free Exercise Guarantees, Mark Strasser

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Contents

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unconstitutional Quartering, Governmental Immunity, And Van Halen's Brown M&M Test, Tom W. Bell

Tennessee Law Review

The jurisprudence of the Third Amendment, which limits the quartering of troops in private homes, effectively consists of just one case: Engblom v. Carey.' But what a case! In addition to showcasing an unjustly neglected corner of our constitutional heritage, Engblom demonstrates the troubling effects of a dubious legal doctrine: governmental immunity. Though the court of appeals had held New York officials potentially liable for violating the Third Amendment when they had quartered National Guard troops in the dormitory rooms of striking prison guards, the lower court on remand in Engblom denied the plaintiffs a remedy. Why? Because throughout the …

A Word On The Third: Three Approaches To The Third Amendment's Place In Constitutional Rhetoric, Gabriel Latner

Tennessee Law Review

"War is not a courtesy but the most horrible thing in life; and we ought to understand that, and not play at war. We ought to accept this terrible necessity sternly and seriously."

"[The Constitutional Amendment prohibiting forced quartering except in times of] War, (ooh, yeah, good God y'all), what is it good for?"

- War & Peace by Leo Tolstoy and Edwin Starr

Are Houses Of Worship "House[S]" Under The Third Amendment?, Eric Rassbach

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Contents

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Identifying The Culprit In Wrongful Convictions, Valena Elizabeth Beety

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Subject Index

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.