Courts Commons^™

Balancing Preservation With Growth: How Less Judicial Deference To Decisions Made By The Landmarks Preservation Commission Can Save New York City, Amy Cushman

Brooklyn Law Review

The New York City Landmarks Law of 1965, envisioning the preservation of historical treasures, empowered the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) with the authority to designate and regulate landmarks and historic districts. Originally established in response to public outcry over the loss of iconic architectural structures, the LPC aimed to safeguard the city's cultural, social, and architectural legacy. However, this note contends that recent LPC decisions, particularly the issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness for luxury residential construction involving partial demolition of landmarks, betray the original preservation goals. Delving into the legal recourse available under the New York Civil …

Full Moon Or Full Fraud? A Proposed Method For Interpreting Emojis Under Rule 10b-5, Sophie Abrams

Brooklyn Law Review

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many Americans who were stuck at home turned to social media forums in search of community and investing advice. Fifteen million (and counting) of them found community in r/wallstreetbets, a group on Reddit that banded together to drive up the prices of “meme stocks.” Bed Bath and Beyond was one stock that piqued retail investors’ interest after seeing billionaire investor Ryan Cohen take a 10 percent stake and activist role in the company. However, Cohen ended up being a large disappointment to his retail investor fans, as he subsequently sold off his stake …

Plea Bargains, Prosecutorial Breach, And The Curious Right To Cure, Michael D. Cicchini

Brooklyn Law Review

When the prosecutor breaches a plea bargain—e.g., by recommending prison instead of the agreed-upon probation—the defendant is entitled to a remedy: either sentencing in front of a different judge or plea withdrawal. However, if defense counsel objects to the breach, the prosecutor may halfheartedly change the recommendation to probation. Most courts have held that to be an effective “cure”—even when the judge then sentences the defendant to prison, as the prosecutor originally recommended. The right to cure, which was intended for commercial sales contracts, fails miserably in the plea-bargain context. In the above example, the attempted cure is too late, …

Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez

Seattle University Law Review

The Roberts Court holds a well-earned reputation for overturning Supreme Court precedent regardless of the long-standing nature of the case. The Roberts Court knows how to overrule precedent. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), the Court’s majority opinion never intimates that it overrules Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court’s leading opinion permitting race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Instead, the Roberts Court applied Grutter as authoritative to hold certain affirmative action programs entailing racial preferences violative of the Constitution. These programs did not provide an end point, nor did they require assessment, review, periodic expiration, or revision for greater …

The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarship@WashULaw

Jurisdiction stripping is seen as a nuclear option. Its logic is simple: by depriving federal courts of jurisdiction over some set of cases, Congress ensures those courts cannot render bad decisions. In theory, it frees up the political branches and the states to act without fear of judicial second-guessing. To its proponents, it offers the ultimate check on unelected and unaccountable judges. To critics, it poses a grave threat to the separation of powers. Both sides agree, though, that jurisdiction stripping is a powerful weapon. On this understanding, politicians, activists, and scholars throughout American history have proposed jurisdiction stripping measures …

Delegation Run Amok, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

The proper allocation of authority between courts and arbitral tribunals over the enforceability of agreements to arbitrate has long occupied a central place in United States arbitration law, domestic and international alike. From US Supreme Court case law over the years, there has emerged a reasonably well-understood distinction between those issues of enforceability that a court will address if asked by a party to do so and those that it will not. Fundamental to the Court’s jurisprudence is a recognition that some enforceability issues — “gateway issues” — so seriously implicate the consent of parties to arbitrate their disputes that …

The Right To Trial By Jury Shall Remain Inviolate: Jury Trials In Civil Actions In Georgia’S Courts, David E. Shipley

Scholarly Works

Trials, though rare, “shape almost every aspect of procedure,” and the jury trial is a distinctive feature of civil litigation in the United States. The Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ‘preserves’ the right to jury trial “[i]n suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars.” Even though this amendment does not apply to the states, courts in the states “honor the right to the extent it is created in their constitutions or local statutes.”

The Georgia Constitution provides that “[t]he right to trial by jury shall remain inviolate,” and Georgia’s appellate courts have shown …

Reimagining Youngblood's Bad Faith Requirement: Safeguarding Criminal Defendants' Due Process Rights Through A Burden-Shifting Framework, Rita Elfarissi

Michigan Law Review

Criminal defendants face an uphill battle when attempting to prove that the government’s loss or destruction of evidence that could have played a significant role in their defense deprived them of their constitutional due process rights. To make this showing, the defendant must prove that the government lost or destroyed the evidence in bad faith. This requirement is problematic because direct evidence illustrating the subjective intent of the government officials who lost or destroyed the evidence is unlikely to exist, and in the off chance it does, the prosecution is unlikely to freely hand it over to the defendant. Thus, …

Movement For Quality Government V. Knesset, Esther Hayut, Yael Willner, Alex Stein, Gila Canfy-Steinitz, Yechiel Meir Kasher, Noam Sohlberg, David Mintz, Yosef Elron, Isaac Amit, Ruth Ronnen, Uzi Vogelman, Khaled Kabub, Anat Baron, Ofer Grosskopf, Daphne Barak-Erez

Translated Opinions

Movement for Quality Government v. Knesset concerned challenges to Amendment No. 3 to Basic Law: The Judiciary (the “reasonableness amendment”). In view of the controversy surrounding the amendment and the fundamental constitutional question it raised in regard to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to review Basic Laws, the Court took the unprecedented step of sitting en banc. A translation of the official abstract issued by the Court appears here.

On January 1, 2024, a majority of the Court (12 of 15 justices) held that the Court held the authority to conduct judicial review of Basic Laws and to intervene in …

Breaking The Vicious Cycle Fragmenting National Law, Ryan Vacca, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Publications

One of the most troubling and increasingly overlooked problems plaguing the federal judiciary has been the reduction of throughput at the Supreme Court and the resulting fragmentation of national law. The imperative to resolve circuit splits has taken a back seat as the Court grapples with high-profile battles and the relentless crush of certiorari petitions. This fuels confusion and greater fragmentation of national law. Add in the general expansion of national law, and the vicious cycle intensifies.

This Article proposes a solution for expanding structural capacity to address fragmentation that does not require legislative reform or constitutional amendment. It utilizes …

Barrier Breakers: Celebrating The Rhode Island Supreme Court’S First Female Majority, Kailey E. Chalmers

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

From Andy Warhol To Barbie: Copyright’S Fair Use Doctrine After Andy Warhol Foundation V. Goldsmith, Niki Kuckes

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Critical Perspective On Testimonial Injustice: Interrogating Witnesses' Credibility Excess In Criminal Trials, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

This paper offers a critical race theory perspective on the testimonial injustice experienced by racially minoritized criminal defendants in evidential practice. It builds off Federico Picinali’s paper, inter alia, substantiating how minoritized criminal defendants experience testimonial harm through credibility deficit, by exploring epistemic injustice to the same when prosecutorial witnesses receive identity-based credibility excess. It argues that in an adversarial criminal legal system, the testimonial injustice of credibility excess afforded racial in-group prosecutorial witnesses should be considered in tandem with the testimonial injustice of credibility deficit imposed on racial out-group defendants. Only then can the epistemic harm and resultant …

Judges And The Regulatory State: Trends Of Resistance And Restraint, Luke Norris

Law Faculty Publications

The last great confrontation between courts and the regulatory state occurred at the turn of the previous century. As courts in the first decades of the twentieth century resisted regulatory laws designed to protect workers and curb market excesses, they sustained broad legal and public critique, including claims that they were guardians of corporate power and monied and propertied interests. The showdown, as is familiar fare, was seemingly resolved in the New Deal, with the Supreme Court and judiciary largely accepting the constitutionality of federal and state regulatory laws. The compromise that emerged, dubbed the “New Deal settlement,” ostensibly called …

The Supreme Court And The Challenges For Fiscal Federalism: Mineral Area Development Authority V Steel Authority Of India, Sanyukta Chowdhury, Amit Chowdhury

National Law School Journal

This case comment analyses the 2024 Supreme Court judgement in Mineral Area Development Authority v Steel Authority of India, in which the court upheld the states’ power to tax mineral rights and mineral-bearing land. The authors discuss the issues involved, the approach of the bench towards interpretation, and the implications for the parties to the case and other stakeholders. They argue that while fiscal federalism is crucial to India’s constitutional scheme, the bench had limited leeway in deciding the case on this basis due to the absence of legal, doctrinal, and factual clarity.

2023 State-Of-The-States Survey Of Jury Improvement Efforts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Morgan Moffett, Breanna Bell

Faculty Publications

In 2007, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) published findings from the State-of-the-States Survey of Jury Improvement Efforts (SOS Survey), the first comprehensive snapshot of jury operations and jury trial practices in the United States. The 2007 SOS Survey featured three discrete components: a statewide survey documenting legal infrastructure for juries and jury trials in each state; a local court survey, which documented jury operations at the county-level in state courts; and a judge & lawyer survey, which asked respondents to describe the characteristics and procedures employed in their most recent jury trial.

By the mid-2010s, NCSC began receiving …

Shades Of Justice: Exploring Colorism In The Hispanic Community And Its Legal Battle For Equity, Christel A. Infante

Honors Undergraduate Theses

This thesis focuses on the racial disparity within the Hispanic and Latinx communities as injustices exist within the community and the workplace. Racial disparities in the United States have been a persistent and deeply rooted issue that has plagued the nation for centuries. Despite significant progress in civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation, disparities in areas such as education, employment, and criminal justice persist. Understanding the factors contributing to these disparities is essential for addressing systemic inequalities and fostering a more just society. The analysis of this thesis primarily focuses on the cases and ramifications of Hispanic persons within the workplace, …

The Constitutional Court Of Kosovo In Comparative Perspective, Christie S. Warren

Faculty Publications

...presented at the Solemn Ceremony of the 14th Judicial Year of the Constitutional Court, held on 23 October 2023 in Prishtina and on the occasion of the International Conference “Contribution of Constitutional Courts in the protection and strengthening of the fundamental values of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental human rights and freedoms”, organized on 24 October 2023 in Prishtina.

The Constitutional Court Of Indonesia As A Post-Conflict Institution, Christie S. Warren

Faculty Publications

In post-conflict settings, constitutional courts have important roles to play despite complex and often competing challenges they face to institutionalize their legitimacy and entrench the rule of law while attempting to build bridges from conflict to peace. By processing political conflict through legal means, constitutional courts can shift the tenor of public dialogue and provide a less inflammatory platform for analyzing conflicts that have divided societies. This article analyzes two seminal cases decided by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia in the aftermath of post- Suharto conflict and finds that despite its young age, the Court addressed lustration issues and a …

Standing For Elections In State Courts, Miriam Seifter, Adam B. Sopko

Publications

Litigation has become a fixture of electoral contests. Litigants today often challenge every step of an election, from the results themselves to picayune aspects of administration. In response to this deluge, some courts have rejected election lawsuits on standing grounds. Such rulings may be unsurprising in federal court, given the tension between the federal standing doctrine's injury requirements and the generalized nature of many election disputes. But most recent election cases take place in state court, where neither Article III nor the premises animating federal standing doctrine apply. State courts need election justiciability theories of their own.

This Article explores …

Standing Without Injury, Jonathan Adler

Faculty Publications

This Article seeks to assess Judge Newsom’s proposed injury-less approach to standing in federal court. Part I of this Article provides a brief overview of current standing doctrine, the requirements of standing consolidated in Lujan, and how these requirements have been interpreted and applied by the Supreme Court. Part II describes Judge Newsom’s critique of contemporary standing doctrine and outlines the two primary components of his proposed alternative: 1) elimination of the standing requirement in favor of a simple cause-of-action requirement and 2) recognition of an external constraint on standing derived from Article II, rather than Article III.

Part …

The Reno Court Of Inquiry, Albert Winkler

Faculty Publications

Following the Battle of the Little Big Horn, there had been many accusations of poor conduct, neglect of duty, or outright cowardice leveled chiefly at both Major Marcus Reno and Captain Frederick Benteen for their actions or inactions at the engagement, which could have led to the destruction of Custer's command. Most significantly, Frederick Whittaker's attack on Reno and Benteen in his A Complete Life of Gen. George Armstrong Custer published in December 1876 was simply scathing.

To Legitimacy And Beyond: A Reform Agenda To Restore Public Confidence In The Federal Courts, Charles G. Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The article begins by describing he ongoing cycle of anti-court sentiment directed at the federal courts. It situates that cycle in historical context, to the end of showing how independence norms have evolved to constrain more draconian efforts to curb the courts in those cycles. The article then explains why the latest cycle is unusually aggressive and why norms that have protected the judiciary’s independence for generations may be at risk if public skepticism of the courts reaches the point of undermining the judiciary’s perceived legitimacy. Next, the article sorts through the definitional clutter that complicates assessments of whether the …

Analisis Pengaturan Ambang Batas Pencalonan Presiden Menurut Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Tahun 2022-2023, Mochamad Rizky Soeoed

Jurnal Konstitusi & Demokrasi

The constitutional amendments that took place from 1999 to 2022 emphasized that Indonesia adheres to a presidential system of government. One way that is often discussed to increase the effectiveness of the presidential government system is to hold elections simultaneously by implementing the presidential nomination threshold which is now regulated in article 222 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections which provides conditions for political parties to obtain a minimum of 20 percent of DPR seats. or 25 percent of valid national votes to be able to nominate candidates for President and Vice President. In practice, this provision always …

#Metoo & The Courts: The Impact Of Social Movements On Federal Judicial Decisionmaking, Carol T. Li, Matthew E.K. Hall, Veronica Root Martinez

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In late 2017, the #MeToo movement swept through the United States as individuals from all backgrounds and walks of life revealed their experiences with sexual abuse and sexual harassment. After the #MeToo movement, many scholars, advocates, and policymakers posited that the watershed moment would prompt changes in the ways in which sexual harassment cases were handled. This Article examines the impact the #MeToo movement has had on judicial decisionmaking. Our hypothesis is that the #MeToo movement’s increase in public awareness and political attention to experiences of sexual misconduct should lead to more pro-claimant voting in federal courts at the district …

Twenty-First Century Split: Partisan, Racial, And Gender Differences In Circuit Judges Following Earlier Opinions, Stuart Minor Benjamin, Kevin M. Quinn, Byungkoo Kim

BYU Law Review

Judges shape the law with their votes and the reasoning in their opinions. An important element of the latter is which opinions they follow, and thus elevate, and which they cast doubt on, and thus diminish. Using a unique and comprehensive dataset containing the substantive Shepard’s treatments of all circuit court published and unpublished majority opinions issued between 1974 and 2017, we examine the relationship between judges’ substantive treatments of earlier appellate cases and their party, race, and gender. Are judges more likely to follow opinions written by colleagues of the same party, race, or gender? What we find is …

“Any”, James J. Brudney, Ethan J. Leib

BYU Law Review

Our statute books use the word “any” ubiquitously in coverage and exclusion provisions. As any reader of the Supreme Court’s statutory interpretation docket would know, a large number of cases turn on the contested application of this so-called universal quantifier. It is hard to make sense of the jurisprudence of “any.” And any effort to offer a unified approach—knowing precisely when its scope is expansive (along the “literal-meaning” lines of “every” and “all”) or confining (having a contained domain related to properties provided by contextual cues)—is likely to fail. This Article examines legislative drafting manuals, surveys centuries of Court decisions, …

Volume 6, Issue 1 (2023) Criminal Justice Agents And Responsibility, Colleen Berryessa, Elizabeth Griffiths, Kaitlen Hubbard, Deena A. Isom, Kateryna Kaplun, Hiuxuan Li, Siyu Liu, Esther Nir, Heather L. Scheuerman, Rachel Schumann, Sandy Xie, Carolyn Yule

International Journal on Responsibility

This special issue of the International Journal on Responsibility (IJR) advances scholarship on the various ways responsibility infuses the roles of criminal justice agents. As the inaugural issue of my tenure as Editor-in-Chief, Volume 6 deepens our understanding of responsibility in the context of the criminal justice system, thereby fulfilling IJR’s aim and scope. Specifically, the articles highlight issues of responsibility within each component of the criminal justice system: police, courts, and corrections.

The Ninth Amendment: The "Hard Problem" Of U.S. Constitutional Law, Jorge M. Farinacci Fernós

Journal Articles

Like with the mythical lamp that can grant any three wishes, federal courts in the United States have buried the Ninth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution deep within the sands of American law in order to avoid coming to terms with its potential regarding the protection of unenumerated constitutional rights. Courts have been able to do so, in part, because of the seemingly impossible task of extracting from the text and history of the Ninth Amendment sufficient elements needed to identify which unenumerated rights may be subject to judicial enforcement.

This impossibility is an illusion and is contrary to the …

The Curious Case Of Justice Neil Gorsuch, Justin Burnworth

Pace Law Review

Justice Gorsuch has a propensity for unexpected decisions. His opinions in Bostock v. Clayton County, United States v. Vaello Madero, and McGirt v. Oklahoma confounded the legal community at large. Some argue that his Western upbringing played a role. Others argue that his time clerking for Justice Kennedy primed him for unpredictable decisions. These explanations do not get at the core of Justice Gorsuch’s legal reasoning. This article dives into the depths of these opinions to extract his “Enduring” theories of law. I argue that legal scholarship has incorrectly viewed these three decisions as isolated incidents when they are best …