Courts Commons^™

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 …

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 …

The Perilous Focus Shift From The Rule Of Law To Appellate Efficiency, Elizabeth Lee Thompson

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Among the most significant—and by some estimations the most controversial—transformations of the federal appellate system occurred in the late 1960s and 1970s with effects still felt today: the shift from oral argument for all appeals and the view that study and disposition of each appeal were exclusively judicial tasks to the adoption of a tiered appellate system where the great majority of appeals receive no oral argument and instead summary disposition often involving staff attorneys. These transformative internal efficiency procedures have been subject to intense debate. Proponents have praised their efficiency and ability to avoid a backlog while critics complain …

The Emerging Constitutional Law Of Remote Criminal Justice, Jenia I. Turner

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The COVID-19 pandemic compelled courts to experiment with a novel mode of criminal process: conducting proceedings via video. The remote format helped protect public health during the pandemic, and its convenience has led many states to continue using it in certain circumstances. Yet questions about its desirability and constitutionality have lingered, and many are concerned that it undermines the justice and integrity of criminal proceedings. As the future of remote criminal justice is up for debate, it is important to assess to what degree it complies with fundamental constitutional principles. To that end, this Article offers a comprehensive analysis of …

Reimagining The Inclusive Jury, Anna Offit

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, everyday life for many Americans was upended. And yet, the jury trial remained viable — even vital. Faced with an era-defining public health disaster, courts innovated, embracing novel technologies and techniques to reimagine where and how justice might be made. But why did it take a pandemic to spur this kind of institutional creativity? Prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, people who were otherwise eligible to participate as jurors were routinely — and uncontroversially — struck or exempted from service due to limited mobility, vision and hearing loss, and caregiving responsibilities. Recent experience …

Michigan Senators' Crucial Role In Keeping Federal Courts Full, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

One critical responsibility that the American Constitution assigns senators is the provision of comprehensive advice and consent respecting accomplished federal judicial candidates suggested by the President to serve, particularly in their home states. Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow, who is completing her fourth term representing Michigan, has always joined with her colleague Democratic Senator Gary Peters in the administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to astutely discharge this crucial responsibility. Stabenow and Peters exercised sound judgment, intelligence, hard work, and keen appreciation for the distinct roles that the Constitution accords the President and senators in the confirmation …

Judges And The Regulatory State: Trends Of Resistance And Restraint, Luke P. 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 …

Problem-Solving Courts And The Outcome Oversight Gap, Erin R. Collins

Law Faculty Publications

Drug courts-and the litany of other problem-solving courts that soon followed in their wake-began as a series of small-scale judicial experiments in criminal punishment reform. They were earnest efforts by criminal court judges to redress an issue that they were well-equipped to see: many people were returning to their courtrooms time and again, often for low-level drug charges, and at a time when court dockets were ballooning because of tough-on-crime arrest and prosecution policies. Early drug court judges combined their power to punish with their authority to control their dockets to create specialized court calendars aimed at providing substance abuse …

Trademark Fair Use Is No Joke, Christine Haight Farley

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article critiques the Supreme Court's decision in Jack Daniel's Properties v. VIP Products, arguing that the Court missed an opportunity to clarify the relationship between trademark law and the First Amendment. While the Court acknowledged the importance of protecting parodies, it failed to develop a comprehensive framework for balancing trademark rights with free speech. Instead, it introduced a narrow rule that limits the application of the Rogers test, potentially undermining speech protections in trademark disputes. The article contends that the Court's reliance on the likelihood of confusion test is insufficient to address the broader First Amendment implications of …

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.

Christian Domination, Ruth Colker

American University Law Review

It is hard to deny that the United States is a Christian nation despite the First Amendment’s promise that the legislature will not establish a religion. The United States is not a Christian nation merely because of the religious beliefs that many people privately hold. It is a Christian nation, in part, because the courts and legislatures have facilitated that development. Moreover, as this Article will argue, Christian favoritism within the political and legal system has developed in sharp contrast to the treatment of Black people, women, the LGBTQ+ community, and disabled people.

This Article explores the development of Christian …

Review Of Veterans Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit 2022-2023 Edition, Yelena Duterte, Hugh Mcclean, Stacey-Rae Simcox

American University Law Review

In 2022 to 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) continued its conversation with the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”), Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”), and veterans to help sculpt the jurisprudence coming from the youngest of the federal courts, the Veterans Court. The Federal Circuit’s jurisprudence addressed ten main legal issues: class actions, petitions for writ of mandamus under the All Writs Act, defining standards of proof with the term “results from,” the benefit of the doubt doctrine post-Lynch, education benefits, less than honorable discharges, the rating schedule, implicit denials, equitable …

A Year In Review: The Federal Circuit's 2023 Government Contract Law Decisions, Sophie Marsh, Taylor Mcdaniels, Allison Moors

American University Law Review

This Article continues previous in-depth reviews of government contract law cases decided by the Federal Circuit and published by the American University Law Review. In 2023, the Federal Circuit clarified the appropriate standard of review, emphasizing that, more likely than not, the Boards of Contract Appeals should apply a de novo standard of review. Additionally, the court set significant judicial precedent by holding that the issues of party standing, timely raising a solicitation defect, and asserting a sum certain are nonjurisdictional. Finally, the court also issued decisions concerning implied-in-fact contracts, excusable delays, and the importance of reporting unallowable costs.

Litigating Original Meaning From Heller To Rahimi: The Role Of Lawyering In The Confused Path Of Second Amendment Jurisprudence, Lawrence Rosenthal

American University Law Review

The Second Amendment is on a jurisprudential march. An individual right to “keep and bear arms” for purposes unrelated to militia or military service was not recognized until the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision, applying what it took to be the original meaning of the “right to keep and bear arms” found in the Second Amendment, in District of Columbia v. Heller. Subsequently, the Court, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, invalidated a statute requiring a permit to carry concealable firearms on a showing of particularized need. Most recently, in United States v. Rahimi, …

The Downstream Consequences Of Transunion Llc V. Ramirez: Why 5 U.S.C. § 2954 Plaintiffs Have Article Iii Standing Consistent With Lower Courts’ Interpretation Of Transunion, Erin Mccoy

American University Law Review

The Supreme Court, in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, created additional standing hurdles by requiring plaintiffs to identify a common law historic-analogue when alleging a statutory harm. In doing so, the Court arguably limited informational standing—a unique Article III standing theory whereby plaintiffs may establish an injury for failure to receive information—because informational injuries did not exist at common law.

This Comment asks whether informational standing survives in a post-TransUnion universe, using 5 U.S.C. § 2954 and lower courts’ interpretation of TransUnion for guidance. The statute, § 2954, comes to light in a string of litigation involving the potential illegality …

Converse-Osborn: State Sovereign Immunity, Standing, And The Dog-Wagging Effect Of Article Iii, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

“[T]he legislative, executive, and judicial powers, of every well-constructed government, are co-extensive with each other . . . [T]he judicial department may receive from the Legislature the power of construing any . . . law [which the Legislature may constitutionally make].” Chief Justice Marshall relied on this axiom in Osborn v. Bank of the United States to stress the breadth of the federal judicial power: The federal courts must have the potential power to adjudicate any claim based on any law Congress has the power to enact. In recent years, however, the axiom has sometimes operated in the opposite direction: …

Colonizing Queerness, Jeremiah A. Ho

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article investigates how and why the cultural script of inequality persists for queer identities despite major legal advancements such as marriage, anti-discrimination, and employment protections. By regarding LGBTQ legal advancements as part of the American settler colonial project, I conclude that such victories are not liberatory or empowering but are attempts at colonizing queer identities. American settler colonialism’s structural promotion of a normative sexuality illustrates how our settler colonialist legacy is not just a race project (as settler colonialism is most widely studied) but also a race-gender-sexuality project. Even in apparent strokes of progress, American settler colonialism’s eliminationist motives …

Nationality, Chiara Giorgetti

Law Faculty Publications

Nationality provides the foundation for the protection of a person, be it natural or corporate, under international law. As such, it is an essential and also a complex concept. It is essential because it provides the crucial link between the State and physical or juridical persons that ties the substantive principles of international investment law (IIL) to those individuals who can benefit from them, and thus also grants them access to their rights and remedies. It is also a complex concept because it is both a domestic and an international concept and not neatly regulated. International law recognizes the right …

Altered Stakes: Reimagining The Amount-In-Controversy Requirement, Steven Gensler, Roger Michalski

Faculty Articles

Which state-law cases should Congress allow into federal court? Congress's answer has always been "only the big ones." This article revisits the choice to limit diversity jurisdiction to higher-value cases and critically examines how Congress has approached setting the amount threshold. It surveys alternate ways Congress could use case value to sort which cases make it into the diversity docket. We explore lotteries, auctioning access to the highest bidder, setting an amount in controversy maximum rather than the current minimum, pegging the jurisdictional amount to the minimum wage or the cost of a hamburger, employing relative measures that use multiples …

The Wages Of Hitching Wagons, Thomas B. Bennett

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article examines the challenges faced by states that align their constitutions with federal doctrine through the practice of "lockstepping"—adopting federal legal standards into state law. Lockstepping binds states to federal law, regardless of its trajectory. Part I traces the evolution of standing doctrine in both federal courts under Article III and Kentucky courts under its constitution. Part II presents an originalist critique of the federal injury-in-fact requirement, highlighting emerging efforts to abandon this requirement in federal courts. Part III discusses the dilemma states like Kentucky face, balancing constitutional interpretation, federalism, and legal stability.

What Mediation Romantics Can Learn From The Model T (Or Maybe The Chevrolet Trax), Nancy A. Welsh

Faculty Scholarship

When mediation was reintroduced to the U.S. in the 1970s, it was infused with a democracy-and-self-determination-enhancing, social justice ethos. As the process has been very successfully institutionalized, however, these ambitions have been scaled backalthough, at least arguably, certain "mediative elements" have actually been adopted (or coopted) by other procedural innovations. Perhaps it is time for those of us frustrated with the evolution of mediation to reconcile ourselves to the reality and value of a "basic" model of mediation designed for the sole purpose of getting parties from dispute to settlement-in much the same way that the basic model of a …

Merging The Bench, Bar, And Law Schools: How A Student Scholars Program Achieves Professional Identity Through Scholarly Writing, Mentorship, And Presentation, Joan Foley, Robin Boyle, Troy Kessler

Scholarly Works

This Article describes an innovative co-curricular program, the Student Scholars Program, that provides law students with an opportunity to present their scholarly papers before the bench, bar, and law school community. The Program aids law schools in meeting accreditation standards, such as the ABA Standards 302 and 303. Standard 302 requires law schools to achieve specific learning outcomes. Standard 303(b)(3) requires law schools to provide "substantial opportunities" for students to develop a "professional identity." This program aids schools in achieving these standards. Furthermore, this program increases interaction between students and the legal profession by creating episodic mentoring opportunities. Launched in …

Is Jacobson V. Massachusetts Viable After A Century Of Dormancy? A Review In The Face Of Covid-19, Sawan Talwar

Touro Law Review

The COVID-19 pandemic has stretched us into the vast unknowns, emotionally, logically, politically, and legally. Relying on their police power, governments inched into the darkness of the powers’ fullest extent, leaving many to wonder whether the exercise of this power was constitutional. This Article examines the extent of the police power that both the federal and state governments have, and how Jacobson v. Massachusetts1 was the “silver bullet” for governments across the United States. Further, this Article provides an overview of police power, and the status of COVID-19 mandates. This Article additionally examines quarantine case law and provides an analysis …

Foreword: The Life, Work & Legacy Of Felix Frankfurter, The Justice Known As “Ff”, Rodger D. Citron

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Professor Derek T. Muller As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Heather Gebelin Hacker, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 23-719
Donald J. Trump v. Norma Anderson

On Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Colorado

From the Summary of Argument

States hold the power to adjudicate the qualifications of presidential candidates. That power extends to the general election, even though the election is formally a process to appoint presidential electors. And that power extends to the primary election, even though state voters are formally selecting delegates to a party’s nominating convention. But states have no obligation to evaluate the qualifications of presidential candidates, and states may choose to permit openly unqualified presidential candidates to appear on the …

Deepfakes In Court: How Judges Can Proactively Manage Alleged Ai-Generated Material In National Security Cases, Abhishek Dalal, Chongyang Gao, Paul W. Grimm, Maura R. Grossman, Daniel W. Linna Jr., Chiara Pulice, V. S. Subrahmanian, John Tunheim

Faculty Scholarship

Dall-E. ChatGPT GPT-4. Words that did not exist in the English lexicon just a few years ago are now commonplace. With the widespread availability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, specifically Generative AI, whether in the context of text, audio, video, imagery, or even combinations of these, it is inevitable that trials related to national security will involve evidentiary issues raised by Generative AI. We must confront two possibilities: first, that evidence presented is AI-generated and not real and, second, that other evidence is genuine but alleged to be fabricated. Technologies designed to detect AI-generated content have proven to be unreliable, …

False Accuracy In Criminal Trials: The Limits And Costs Of Cross Examination, Lisa Kern Griffin

Faculty Scholarship

According to the popular culture of criminal trials, skillful cross-examination can reveal the whole “truth” of what happened. In a climactic scene, defense counsel will expose a lying accuser, clear up the statements of a confused eyewitness, or surface the incentives and biases in testimony. Constitutional precedents, evidence theory, and trial procedures all reflect a similar aspiration—that cross-examination performs lie detection and thereby helps to produce accurate outcomes. Although conceptualized as a protection for defendants, cross-examination imposes some unexplored costs on them. Because it focuses on the physical presence of a witness, the current law of confrontation suggests that an …

Partisan Panel Composition And Reliance On Earlier Opinions In The Circuit Courts, Stuart Minor Benjamin, Byungkoo Kim, Kevin M. Quinn

Faculty Scholarship

Does the partisan composition of three-judge panels affect how earlier opinions are treated and thus how the law develops? Using a novel data set of Shepard's treatments for all cases decided in the U.S. courts of appeals from 1974 to 2017, we investigate three different versions of this question. First, are panels composed of three Democratic (Republican) appointees more likely to follow opinions decided by panels of three Democratic (Republican) appointees than are panels composed of three Republican (Democratic) appointees? Second, does the presence of a single out-party judge change how a panel relies on earlier decisions compared to what …

Originalism And Historical Fact-Finding, Joseph Blocher, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

Historical facts are more central to constitutional litigation than ever before, given the Supreme Court’s increasing reliance on originalism and other modes of interpretation that invoke historical practice and tradition. This raises a central tension. The case for originalism has rested largely on the idea that it is simultaneously fact-bound and a theory of adjudication capable of resolving questions of constitutional law. In practice, however, the historical facts central to originalism typically are not litigated in accordance with standard practices for fact-finding: introduction at trial, expert testimony, adversarial testing, deference on appeal, and so on.

In the absence of the …