Courts Commons^™

Why Federal Courts Apply The Law Of Nations Even Though It Is Not The Supreme Law Of The Land, Anthony J. Bellia Jr., Bradford R. Clark

Journal Articles

We are grateful to the judges and scholars who participated in this Symposium examining our book, The Law of Nations and the United States Constitution. One of our goals in writing this book was to reinvigorate and advance the debate over the role of customary international law in U.S. courts. The papers in this Symposium advance this debate by deepening understandings of how the Constitution interacts with customary international law. Our goal in this Article is to address two questions raised by this Symposium that go to the heart of the status of the law of nations under the Constitution. …

Chevron Patterns In The Circuit Courts, Christina L. Boyd, Kent Barnett, Christopher J. Walker

Scholarship@WashULaw

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC required courts to defer to federal agencies reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutes that are administered through the agency. However, recently this “Chevron deference” has been called into question by the judiciary, the legal academy, and Congress. In this essay we briefly describe and highlight three of the most noteworthy findings from our empirical study of over 1,300 decisions of agency statutory interpretation (based on articles published in Chevron in the Circuit Courts, 116 Mich. L. Rev. 1 (2017) (Barnett and Walker); Chevron Step Two’s Domain, 93 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1441 (2018) (Barnett and Walker); …

The Jury Sunshine Project: Jury Selection Data As A Political Issue, Ronald F. Wright, Kami Chavis, Gregory S. Parks

Faculty Publications

In this Article, the authors look at jury selection from the viewpoint of citizens and voters, standing outside the limited boundaries of constitutional challenges. They argue that the composition of juries in criminal cases deserves political debate outside the courtroom. Voters should use the jury selection habits of judges and prosecutors to assess the overall health of local criminal justice: local conditions are unhealthy when the full-time courtroom professionals build juries that exclude parts of the local community, particularly when they exclude members of traditionally marginalized groups such as racial minorities. Every sector of society should participate in the administration …

Appeals Court Denies Sperm Donor Paternity Test, Arthur S. Leonard

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

The "Broadest Reasonable Interpretation" And Applying Issue Preclusion To Administrative Patent Claim Construction, Jonathan I. Tietz

Michigan Law Review

Inventions are tangible. Yet patents comprise words, and words are imprecise. Thus, disputes over patents involve a process known as “claim construction,” which formally clarifies the meaning of a patent claim’s words and, therefore, the scope of the underlying property right. Adversarial claim construction commonly occurs in various Article III and Article I settings, such as district courts or the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). When these proceedings ignore each other’s claim constructions, a patent’s scope can become inconsistent and unpredictable. The doctrine of issue preclusion could help with this problem. The Supreme Court recently reemphasized in B & …

Neither Limited Nor Simplified: A Proposal For Reform Of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 222(B), Michael S. Smith

Michigan Law Review

A limited and simplified discovery system should broaden access to courts, resolve disputes quickly, and expedite relief to injured parties. It should not incentivize procedural gamesmanship or increase the system’s complexity. Regrettably, Illinois’s “limited and simplified” discovery system does both. The initiation procedure for the simplified system, Rule 222(b), creates procedural traps and perverse incentives for both plaintiffs and defendants, and conflicting appellate interpretations of the Rule intensify the problem. This Note examines the flaws underlying the current simplified discovery scheme and argues for reform. It examines simplified discovery schemes in other states to recommend a new system for initiating …

Introduction: Canada's Chief Justice: Beverley Mclachlin's Legacy Of Law And Leadership, Marcus Moore

All Faculty Publications

Summarizes the legacy of law and leadership of Beverley McLachlin, the longest-serving Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada (2000-2017), and first female Chief Justice.

Justice As Harmony: The Distinct Resonance Of Chief Justice Beverley Mclachlin's Juridical Genius, Marcus Moore

All Faculty Publications

Chief Justice McLachlin’s juridical work has earned special praise, but what specifically distinguishes it among the work of other leading jurists has proven elusive for lawyers and social scientists to identify. My experience as a law clerk to McLachlin CJC suggested a distinct approach never comprehensively articulated, but intuitively well-known and widely-emulated among those in her sphere of influence. Drawing on the Chief Justice’s public lectures—where she often explained and offered deeper reflection on the McLachlin Court’s defining jurisprudence—I make the case in this article that at the heart of that approach is a quality best described as the pursuit …

Assessing Access-To-Justice Outreach Strategies, J. J. Prescott

Articles

The need for prospective beneficiaries to “take up” new programs is a common stumbling block for otherwise well-designed legal and policy innovations. I examine the take-up problem in the context of publicly provided court services and test the effectiveness of various outreach strategies that announce a newly available online court access platform. I study individuals with minor arrest warrants whose distrust of courts may dampen any take-up response. I partnered with a court to quasi-randomly assign outreach approaches to a cohort of individuals and find that outreach improves take-up, that the type of outreach matters, and that online platform access …

Crowdsourcing & Data Analytics: The New Settlement Tools, Bernard Chao, Christopher Robertson, David Yokum

Faculty Scholarship

By protecting the right to a jury, the State and Federal Constitutions recognize the fundamental value of having civil and criminal disputes resolved by laypersons. However actual trials are relatively rare, in part because parties seek to avoid the risks and cost of trials, and courts seek to clear dockets efficiently. Even as settlement may be desirable, it is sometimes difficult to resolve a dispute. Parties naturally view their cases from different perspectives, and these perspectives often cause both sides to be overly optimistic, seeking unreasonably large or unreasonably small resolutions.
/="/">
/="/">This article describes a novel method of …

Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Will Delaware Be Different? An Empirical Study Of Tc Heartland And The Shift To Defendant Choice Of Venue, Ofer Eldar, Neel U. Sukhatme

Faculty Scholarship

Why do some venues evolve into litigation havens while others do not? Venues might compete for litigation for various reasons, such as enhancing their judges’ prestige and increasing revenues for the local bar. This competition is framed by the party that chooses the venue. Whether plaintiffs or defendants primarily choose venue is crucial because, we argue, the two scenarios are not symmetrical.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods illustrates this dynamic. There, the Court effectively shifted venue choice in many patent infringement cases from plaintiffs to corporate defendants. We use TC Heartland to empirically measure …

Curing The Federal Court Vacancy Crisis, Carl Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The federal judiciary has experienced a vacancy crisis, which has intensified over President Donald Trump's tenure when judicial openings significantly increased from the 105 vacancies at his inauguration. Despite these concerns, analysts hail court selection as Trump's paramount success. This Article canvasses the rise and expansion of the crisis and scrutinizes the practices which Trump and the I 15th Senate instituted, as Republican concentration on quickly appointing many conservative appeals court judges resulted in departures from longstanding precedents and undermined the presidential discharge of constitutional responsibilities to nominate and confirm impressive jurists as well as senatorial duties to advise and …

Benefits And Costs Of Civil Justice Reform, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

For more than a century, excessive costs and delays have been a chronic complaint about the American civil justice system. Although some states took steps to improve civil case processing in the past, most of those efforts had only a negligible effect, if any, and few were able to sustain those effects over time. Recently, however, a number of states have implemented civil justice reforms that couple changes in pro­cedural rules with improved civil case automation and staffing models that offer new hope for significant improvements in civil case processing. This paper focuses on four reforms implemented in the Eleventh …

Family Justice Initiative: The Landscape Of Domestic Relations Cases In State Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Lydia Hamblin, Brittney Via, Natalie Anne Knowlton

Faculty Publications

The Family Justice Initiative (FJI) Landscape study represents the first large, aggregate examination of how family court cases are litigated in the state courts. Much of the findings confirmed conventional wisdom about family court litigation, though several offered new insights into the typical domestic relations case. The study findings also raise questions both of how domestic relations cases should be managed and whether the judicial branch is still the most appropriate forum for such cases.

This report documents the caseload characteristics of domestic relations cases disposed between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, across eleven large, urban courts. Three …

Changing Times, Changing Relationships For The Bench And Civil Bar, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

For the past century, the interests of the bench and bar in delivering justice to civil litigants were closely aligned. As civil litigants’ needs change, courts recognize they must lead the way on civil justice reforms both for their own sake and to encourage productive change in civil legal practice.

Dethroning The Hierarchy Of Authority, Amy J. Griffin

Publications

The use of authority in legal argument is constantly evolving—both the types of information deemed authoritative and their degree of authoritativeness—and that evolution has accelerated in recent years with dramatic changes in access to legal information. In contrast, the uncontroversial and ubiquitous “hierarchy of authority” used as the cornerstone for all legal analysis has remained entirely fixed. This article argues that the use of the traditional hierarchy as the dominant model for legal authority is deeply flawed, impeding a deeper understanding of the use of authority in legal argument. Lawyers, judges, and academics all know this, and yet no scholarly …

The Disruptive Neuroscience Of Judicial Choice, Anna Spain Bradley

Publications

Scholars of judicial behavior overwhelmingly substantiate the historical presumption that most judges act impartially and independent most of the time. The reality of human behavior, however, says otherwise. Drawing upon untapped evidence from neuroscience, this Article provides a comprehensive evaluation of how bias, emotion, and empathy—all central to human decision-making—are inevitable in judicial choice. The Article offers three novel neuroscientific insights that explain why this inevitability is so. First, because human cognition associated with decision-making involves multiple, and often intersecting, neural regions and circuits, logic and reason are not separate from bias and emotion in the brain. Second, bias, emotion, …

Celebrating Mundane Conflict, Deborah J. Cantrell

Publications

This Article interrogates the dominant conception of conflict and challenges the narrative of conflict as hard, difficult and painful to engage. The Article reveals two primary framing errors that cause one to misperceive how ubiquitous and ordinary is conflict. The first error is to misperceive conflict as categorical — something either is a conflict or it is not. People make that error as a way of trying to avoid conflict. People falsely hope that there might be a category of “not conflict,” like disagreements, that will be easier to navigate. The second error is to misperceive the world and individuals …

Heretical Archives: Heterotopic Institutions And Fictive Records, Peter Goodrich

Articles

No abstract provided.

What Does It Mean To Be ‘Pro-Arbitration’?, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

International arbitration commentators commonly ask of a proposed policy or practice whether it is ‘pro-’ or ‘anti-arbitration’. Framing the question that way presupposes a shared understanding of what does or does not make a policy or practice arbitration-friendly. In truth, the ways in which policies or practices may affect international arbitration’s well-being are manifold. They may even distinctly serve international arbitration’s well-being in some respects while equally distinctly disserving it in others. It behooves those who take international; arbitration’s well-being seriously to acknowledge the multiplicity of metrics for identifying what is ‘pro-’ and what is ‘anti-arbitration’ and to seek the …

Comparative Approaches To Constitutional History, Jamal Greene, Yvonne Tew

Faculty Scholarship

An historical approach to constitutional interpretation draws upon original intentions or understandings of the meaning or application of a constitutional provision. Comparing the ways in which courts in different jurisdictions use history is a complex exercise. In recent years, academic and judicial discussion of “originalism” has obscured both the global prevalence of resorting to historical materials as an interpretive resource and the impressive diversity of approaches courts may take to deploying those materials. This chapter seeks, in Section B, to develop a basic taxonomy of historical approaches. Section C explores in greater depth the practices of eight jurisdictions with constitutional …

Learned Hand On Statutory Interpretation: Theory And Practice, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

It is a great honor to take part in the celebration of the Second Circuit’s 125th anniversary and in particular to present the Hands Lecture. The Second Circuit in the 1930s and 1940s came to be called the “Hand Court,” and during those years it established its reputation as the most admired of the U.S. circuit courts of appeals. It was called the Hand Court because two of its judges, who often formed the majority on three-judge panels, bore the surname Hand. They were cousins. Augustus Hand was a few years older than Learned Hand but was appointed to the …

Chevron On Stilts: A Response To Jonathan Siegel, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Whither Chevron? For several years, some justices of the Supreme Court have been questioning Chevron deference, partly on the basis of my constitutional critique of it. It was inevitable that someone would stand up in defense of that doctrine, and I am glad to say that my estimable former colleague Jonathan Siegel has stepped up to the plate. But the defense of the indefensible is not easy.

Although the long-standing conventional critique of Chevron was that it violates the separation of powers and federalism, my criticism is that Chevron deference corrupts the judicial process. As adumbrated in my 2014 …

Amicus Curiae Professor Marin K. Levy’S Amicus Brief In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellant Governor Roy A. Cooper, Iii, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Single Symbolic Dollar: How Nominal Damages Can Keep Lawsuits Alive, Megan E. Cambre

Georgia Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit's August 2017 opinion in
Flanigan's Enterprises v. City of Sandy Springs
deepened a circuit split regarding the role of
nominal damages in the justiciabilityanalysis. The
critical question is whether, in cases involving
constitutional violations, a claim for nominal
damages alone suffices to confer standing or to
defeat mootness when other forms of relief are
unavailable or moot. The Second, Fifth, and Ninth
Circuits have all held that nominal damages alone
are enough, but not without contention from
dissenting judges. The First, Third, Fourth,
Seventh, Eighth, and D.C. Circuitshave considered
the question-but have not conclusively decided its
answer. …

Strategic Publication, Ben Grunwald

Faculty Scholarship

Under the standard account of judicial behavior when a panel of appellate court judges cannot agree on the outcome of a case, the panel has two options. First, it can publish a divided decision with a majority opinion and a dissent. Panels usually do not take this route because a dissent dramatically increases the probability of reversal. The second and more common option is for the panel to bargain and compromise over the reasoning of the decision and then publish a unanimous opinion.

This Article argues that a divided panel has a third option: strategic publication. The panel can choose …

Challenges Facing Judges Regarding Expert Evidence In Criminal Cases, Paul W. Grimm

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Why Courts Fail To Protect Privacy: Race, Age, Bias, And Technology, Bernard Chao, Catherine Durso, Ian Farrell, Christopher Robertson

Faculty Scholarship

The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable “searches and seizures,” but in the digital age of stingray devices and IP tracking, what constitutes a search or seizure? The Supreme Court has held that the threshold question is supposed to depend on and reflect the “reasonable expectations” of ordinary members of the public concerning their own privacy. For example, the police now exploit the “third party” doctrine to access data held by email and cell phone providers, without securing a warrant, on the Supreme Court’s intuition that the public has no expectation of privacy in that information. Is that assumption correct? If …

Ohio's Modern Courts Amendment Must Be Amended: Why And How, Richard S. Walinski, Mark D. Wagoner Jr.

Cleveland State Law Review

A 1968 amendment to the Ohio Constitution granted the Supreme Court of Ohio the authority to promulgate “rules governing practice and procedure” for Ohio courts. The amendment also provided that “[a]ll laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect” and that no rule may “abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right.”

Although the amendment was explicit about automatic repeal of existing laws, it says nothing about whether the General Assembly may legislate on a procedural matter after a court rule takes effect. That silence has caused enduring confusion. …