Courts Commons^™

Assembling Pieces Of Accountability For The Srebrenica Genocide, Annick Pijnenburg, Nataša Nedeski

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

The Srebrenica genocide has been the subject of multiple legal proceedings against various actors before different courts, at both the national and international level. Amongst others, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has sentenced various individual perpetrators, the International Court of Justice has ruled on the responsibility of the Serbian state, and Dutch courts have been asked to rule on the liability of the Dutch state and the United Nations. This raises the following question: to what extent have multiple adjudicatory mechanisms across legal regimes managed to deliver accountability for the Srebrenica genocide and what are the remaining …

Ghost Guns: A Case Study On The Tension Between Public Exigencies And Statutory Construction, Bradley Krause

Catholic University Law Review

Administrative agencies often navigate public policy issues while simultaneously handling complex and highly technical matters. When facing a public emergency, how should courts interpret these agencies’ authorizing statutes? What rules of thumb exist to guide the courts? This Comment answers these questions through a case study on ongoing litigation pertaining to a recent ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) regulation. The regulation, targeted towards ghost guns (also known as “privately manufactured firearms”), seeks to incorporate these weapons within pre-existing definitions in the ATF’s authorizing statute, the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). In spite of challenges to the regulation, …

A Conversation With Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Brett M. Kavanaugh, J. Joel Alicea

Catholic University Law Review

On Thursday, September 26th, 2024, the Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition at The Catholic University of America hosted a conversation between Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and Professor J. Joel Alicea. This was the inaugural event of the new Center. The conversation covered topics such as constitutional interpretation, the separation of powers, religious liberty, and the Catholic intellectual tradition. This is a transcript of the conversation, and the text appears substantially as it was delivered. The video of the event may be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sKvSwzkmqo.

All’S “Fair” In Love & Copyright: Copyright’S Incentivization Of Fiction Through The Second Fair Use Factor & Idea/Expression Dichotomy, Peyton J. Smetana

Catholic University Law Review

Copyright Law is supposed to encourage authors to create works of authorship, both factual and fictional. However, Copyright jurisprudence has developed to only protect expression, and not idea, to ensure the continued dissemination of knowledge. In solidifying this belief, two doctrines—Fair Use and the idea/expression dichotomy—allow for individuals to utilize other works of authorship without it being considered copyright infringement. Though widely used throughout the judicial system, the analysis for both the second Fair Use factor—Nature of the Copyrighted Work—and the idea/expression dichotomy are left without clear guidelines, leaving judges with an insurmountable task of determining what is and is …

Education Within Prisons: The Good And The Bad, Tristan T. Morris

Quest

Independent Study

Research in progress for CRIJ 1301: Introduction to Criminal Justice

Faculty Mentor: Stefanie LeMaire

This manuscript began from a response to a discussion prompt in my Introduction to Criminal Justice course where students were asked to discuss some of the issues facing inmates upon release from incarceration. Tristan completed outside research on the relationship between education and recidivism among incarcerated individuals. More specifically, she wanted to discuss the barriers to successful reintegration and programs that have been introduced to address these concerns. Most offenders will be released from incarceration, and they will reenter our society. There is a …

State V. Sweatt: An Examination Of The Current Confusion In Fourth Amendment Standing, John Archer Hobson

Maine Law Review

In State v. Sweatt the Maine Law Court held that an owner of gems being sold on consignment in a third party's store has standing under the fourth amendment to contest the seizure of the gems. The movants in Sweatt were the targets of several police searches during October and November of 1980. During these searches the police seized tourmaline gemstones which were alleged to have been stolen from Dale Sweatt's former business partner, and miscellaneous personal items belonging to the Sweatts. Subsequently, the Sweatts moved for suppression and return of all these articles. The superior court granted the movants' …

In Defense Of Civil Juries, Peter W. Culley

Maine Law Review

Criticism of the civil jury system is nothing new. In fact, virtually since its inception the civil jury has been embroiled in controversy. Typically critics argue that: the jury cannot handle the complex or technical case; there is great expense and delay attendant to trial by jury; jury adjudication is of low quality; verdicts rendered by different juries in cases involving similar facts often appear inconsistent. Recently, Justice Donald Alexander of the Maine Superior Court stated that "[t]he civil jury system has outlived its usefulness." In support of his basic premise that the civil jury system is merely an historical …

Cyr V. Michaud: Correction Of Clerical Errors With Juror Affidavits, William S. Kany

Maine Law Review

Cyr v. Michaud, a civil suit to recover for personal injuries, was tried before a jury and resulted in a verdict which included specific answers to five interrogatories. After a unanimous verdict for the plaintiff was entered and the jury was discharged, the defendant obtained affidavits from all of the jurors which indicated that the jury had made a mistake. The trial court rejected a motion to correct the error and the defendant appealed. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, ruled that juror affidavits are not admissible to correct errors in the recording of verdicts. The …

The Status Of Jury Trial Waivers In Maine's District Court, Robert M. Knight

Maine Law Review

The power of a defendant to waive jury trial in state and federal criminal prosecutions has long been recognized. At the same time, when the offense charged is serious, i.e., one which invokes a federal constitutional right to jury trial, the United States Supreme Court has required a careful examination of the validity of such a waiver. The waiver rule applicable in Maine's superior court fully appreciates this strict waiver standard. Exercising its rulemaking authority, however, Maine's Supreme Judicial Court adopted a rule (effective in 1982) for waiver of jury trial in the state's district court which seemingly obscured the …

Judge Edward T. Gignoux — A Personal Appreciation, Frank M. Coffin

Maine Law Review

Most occasions for encomia about judges occur when the subject has departed the scene of his accomplishments. Happily, the subject of this issue of the Maine Law Review is still with us and likely to be so for a long time. He also happens to measure up precisely to the overused word "paragon." I use it in the original Latin sense of "whetstone," something to sharpen against or to compare oneself with. My thesis is that Judge Gignoux gives observers of any age, but particularly the young, an inspiring role model. This volume is felicitously dedicated. The ever-present problem is …

Restraining The Prosecutor: Restrictions On Threatening Prosecution For Civil Ends, James A. Trowbridge

Maine Law Review

Prosecutors in some cases agree to dismiss criminal charges, admit a defendant to a diversion program, or enter a nolle prosequi in exchange for the defendant signing a waiver of any civil claims against law enforcement agents, governments, or private persons. The practice of a prosecutor bargaining for the release of law enforcement personnel or others from civil liability raises serious questions concerning the independence of the prosecutorial function, the relationship of prosecutors to other legal institutions, and the application of rules of professional responsibility. Generally, courts have been critical of these arrangements. The Model Code of Professional Responsibility (Code) …

Prejudice And Promise In The Early Years Of The Federal Judiciary, George L. Haskins

Maine Law Review

Preserving the dignity of the human individual and protecting individual rights from the excesses of governmental power have been endemic problems for politically organized society in the western world for centuries. From antiquity and the early middle ages comes the thought that "government" became necessary because of he sinfulness or depravity of man. But it was not suggested that rulers should be all-powerful nor that the people who are governed should be entirely at the mercy of government. Indeed, our classic ideal of the democratic state first emerged in Greece, then briefly again in Rome, and later — but for …

Tuttle V. Raymond: Drawing The Line On Punitive Damages, Elting H. Smith

Maine Law Review

In Tuttle v. Raymond, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, reconsidered the appropriateness of Maine's common law doctrine of punitive damages. Under the doctrine, punitive or exemplary awards are permitted in tort actions, at the factfinder's discretion, for the purpose of deterring wrongful conduct. Prior to Tuttle, a plaintiff raised a claim for such an award if he proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant was guilty of intentional, wanton, malicious, reckless, or grossly negligent behavior. Because of the doctrine's uncertain justification and vague standards, however, punitive damages had become the subject of …

Beyond The Equity Power Of Bankruptcy Courts: Toxic Tort Liabilities In Chapter 11 Cases, Kaighn Smith

Maine Law Review

In 1982, three asbestos product manufacturers filed voluntary petitions for business reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. The common reason for each of these filings was that tort liabilities threatened the financial survival of the corporation. Never, in the history of United States bankruptcy law, had any business sought bankruptcy relief for such a reason. By 1985, two more firms, another asbestos product manufacturer and a pharmaceutical company, filed Chapter 11 petitions for the same reason. The torts of these "debtors" in bankruptcy are similar; they extend from the manufacture and wide-spread marketing of products that …

Affirmative Judicial Case Management: A Viable Solution To The Toxic Product Litigation Crisis, Patrick Francis Harrigan

Maine Law Review

With increasing frequency, federal courts throughout the nation have confronted a multiplicity of "toxic tort" claims, claims for relief arising from chronic and latent illnesses or diseases allegedly caused by toxic substances. Toxic substances are substances whose manufacture, processing, distribution, use, or disposal presents or will present an unreasonable risk of injury to a person's health or to the environment. Because many of these unreasonable health risks are caused by consumer and industrial products, many toxic tort claims are actually "toxic product" claims. Examples of toxic product claims include those arising from the use, exposure to, or consumption of chemicals …

Perreault V. Parker: Findings Tainted By Error, Gisele M. Nadeau

Maine Law Review

An appellate court does not disturb a trial court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous, and, therefore, usually confines its review to an assessment of a trial court's legal conclusions based on those findings of fact. The method used by a trial court in making factual findings, however, involves the application of legal principles. If a trial court fails properly to apply these legal principles in arriving at its findings of fact, these findings may be tainted by the error. This is so, for instance, when a trial court's findings of fact have been "manifestly influenced or controlled" …

State V. Harding: Municipal Police Authority And The Fresh Pursuit Statute, David S. Schuman

Maine Law Review

As early as 1551, during the reign of King Edward VI, courts held at common law that, except in cases of fresh pursuit, the power of a sheriff or justice of the peace does not extend beyond his jurisdiction. Recognizing the importance of jurisdictional boundaries as limits on a sheriff's authority, the Barons of the Exchequer denounced the possibility of "two several sheriffs in one same county," observing that "in this realm there are divers authorities, and none may exceed his limits or bounds." Modern state statutes setting forth the powers of local police continue to limit the extra-jurisdictional authority …

The Denial Of Bail Under Maine's "Proof Evident Or Presumption Great" Standard, Maureen Dea

Maine Law Review

When the framers of the Maine Constitution gathered in Portland in the fall of 1819, they decided that the document, unlike the Massachusetts Constitution on which it was based, should guarantee a right to bail pending trial. The convention adopted, apparently without debate or dissent, the following provision as part of the Declaration of Rights in article I . . .

The Trouble With Classifications, Aziz Z. Huq

Notre Dame Law Review

The Supreme Court relies increasingly on anticlassification rules to implement the Constitution’s various commands of evenhanded state treatment. These rules direct attention to whether an instance of a forbidden classification is present on the face of a challenged law. They contain two necessary steps. First, a court defines a general category of impermissible terms. Second, a court ascertains whether an instance of the category is found in enacted text—so triggering the familiar strict scrutiny analysis. So defined, anticlassification rules now dominate equal protection, free speech, “dormant” Commerce Clause, and even free exercise jurisprudence. The Roberts Court celebrates these doctrinal tests …

The Lost History Of Judicial Restraint, Derek A. Webb

Notre Dame Law Review

For over 125 years, jurists and scholars who have championed judicial restraint have looked back to James Bradley Thayer’s 1893 Harvard Law Review article, The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law, as the seminal authority for the rule that courts should presume the constitutionality of a challenged law and only invalidate it if its unconstitutionality is “clear” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But Thayer presented those three rules (presumption of constitutionality, clear error rule, and reasonable doubt standard) as rooted in historical legal practice in America. And yet none of his twentieth or twenty-first century …

Batson Challenges In Federal, Kansas, And Missouri Courts, Matt Champagne

Law Student Works

In Batson v. Kentucky, 474 U.S. 79 (1986), the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) ruled generally that the use of peremptory strikes to disqualify potential jurors based solely on their race violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Specifically, the Court held that the use of peremptory strikes by the prosecution to exclude all four Black potential jurors from a jury pool, thus seating an all-white petit jury, on no other grounds besides the perspective jurors’ race violated a Black man’s right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that the exclusion of …

Next Steps In Online Courts: Accelerating Access To Justice Through Court Technology, J.J. Prescott

Articles

For more than a decade, state courts have been expanding access to justice by adopting online dispute resolution (ODR) platforms and other outward-facing communication technologies. At a deep level, these reforms aim at improving society by bolstering the rule of law. At a surface level, these innovations recognize that the justice system works better when courts and law are easier and less costly to understand and use. In important respects, these efforts have been a success. The accessibility of many state courts is considerably more robust today than it was ten years ago, at least for small-stakes cases, like traffic …

Rwu Law Alumni Newsletter December 2024, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Pbn Connect, Edward Fitzpatrick, Danna Lorch

RWU Law

No abstract provided.

Preserving The Future Of Juries And Jury Trials, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Hope Forbush, Miriam Hamilton, Jawwaad Johnson, Morgan Moffett

Faculty Publications

To preserve the future of juries and jury trials, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) convened a meeting of representatives from a broad array of justice system stakeholders as a project under the Justice for All Reauthorization Act (JFARA). To frame the stakeholder discussions, NCSC employed strategic foresight, a methodological approach designed to explore a range of possible futures of juries and jury trials within the American justice system as a vehicle for identifying critical vulnerabilities within the current jury system and proposing targeted strategies to preserve and strengthen jury trials. Critical vulnerabilities are those areas of weakness that …

Not-So-Special Solicitude, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

In a high-profile case last term about state standing to sue in federal court, Justice Gorsuch deemed it “hard not to wonder why” the majority said “nothing about ‘special solicitude.’” The silence was indeed surprising, for in a landmark decision several years earlier, the Supreme Court had declared that states were “entitled to special solicitude”—presumably meaning some sort of preferential treatment—“in [the] standing analysis.” And since then, commentators had depicted the concept as permitting opportunistic states to wage ideological crusades in courts across the country, especially through administrative-law attacks on federal-government defendants.

But what if “special solicitude” is not so …

The Geopolitics Of Group Referrals To The International Criminal Court And Its Implications On The Court's Legitimacy And Credibility, Dr. Destaw A. Yigzaw

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

Under the Rome Statute, situations are referred to the International Criminal Court (“ICC” or “Court”) either by a state party or the Security Council. In recent years, however, referrals from both sources have become difficult to come by. Instead, there is an evolving practice of referrals by a coalition of third states parties (“group referrals”). Yet, a group referral as a trigger mechanism does not have an explicit textual basis under the Rome Statute (“Statute” or “ICC Statute”). There is no rationale for it either, since a referral by a single state party is all that is needed to trigger …

Data Scraping For Generative Ai—To What Extent?, Jae Yeon Cecilia Kim

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Generative AI platforms are developed by scraping data from other platforms. This raises complex copyright infringement issues that are yet to be resolved. Courts have attempted to address these problems using the fair use doctrine, which evaluates four factors to determine whether a use infringes on copyright: (1) the purpose and character of the use, (2) the nature of the use, (3) the amount and substantiality of the copyrighted work’s use, and (4) the impact of the use on the market for the original work. Despite efforts to apply this long-established doctrine, challenges persist, including difficulties in identifying the copyright …

A New Governance Framework In Cross-Border Tax Policymaking, Tamir Shanan, Doron Narotzki, Noam Zamir

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

The first tax treaty can probably be traced to the end of the 19th century: the treaty between the Swiss Federal Council (on behalf of the Canton of Vaud) and Great Britain. However, most tax scholars refer to the period following World War I, including the work of the League of Nations, as the formative period in which the international tax regime was founded. In the 1920s, the League of Nations formed a committee of four renowned economists that was asked to formulate a set of rules that would assist states in allocating taxing rights of cross-border income and gains …

The Enduring Relevance Of Congress Despite The Court's Shift To “Ordinary Reader” Statutory Interpretation, Abbe R. Gluck, Laila M. Robbins

Journal of Law and Policy

Has Congress become irrelevant to statutory interpretation? The dominant theoretical and doctrinal paradigm in American statutory interpretation has always been the conversation between Congress and the courts. Today, however, the Court’s new, second-generation textualists claim they have left Congress behind. They argue they have changed textualism’s perspective, from an “insider” perspective focused on Congress’s textual choices, to an “outsider” perspective based on how “ordinary people” read statutes. The Court’s self-professed shift away from a legiscentric approach, if true, would be a seismic shift in the conception of the judicial role. Whereas judges and scholars—including first-generation textualists—had for a century focused …

The Broad Church Of Modern Textualism, Nicole Steitz, Brian G. Slocum, Kevin Tobia

Journal of Law and Policy

Nearly thirty years ago, Justice Scalia’s Tanner lectures branded Holy Trinity Church v. United States (1892) as the anti-textualist archetype, a decision trumping the text’s plain meaning with a suspect judicial investigation of the law’s purpose or spirit. And so Holy Trinity seemed, until Gales and Solan’s groundbreaking empirical study supported an alternative reading of the key statutory term (“labor or service”) that would avoid this conflict between text and purpose. Taking inspiration from Gales and Solan, we reconsider Holy Trinity using the precepts of modern textualism, with its increased emphasis on context, pragmatics, anti-literalism, legal meaning, holistic meaning, non-compositionality, …