Courts Commons^™

How Should We Study District Judge Decision-Making?, Pauline Kim, Margo Schlanger, Christina L. Boyd, Andrew D. Martin

Scholarship@WashULaw

Understanding judicial decision-making requires attention to the specific institutional settings in which judges operate. Yet much of the existing empirical work on federal district courts has failed to take account of the setting in which those judges operate. Too often, empirical studies of the district courts rely on an implicit assumption that judging at the trial court level is fundamentally the same as judging at the appellate level. We argue that this approach is misguided, because the nature of district judges’ work is substantially different from that of appellate judges. For example, unlike in the typical appellate case, a district …

An Examination Of Strategic Anticipation Of Appellate Court Preferences By Federal District Court Judges, Christina L. Boyd, James F. Spriggs

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Essay tackles the complicated relationships within the federal judicial hierarchy with a focus on the relatively understudied connection between the Supreme Court and district courts.

Judging The Judges, Stefanie A. Lindquist, Frank B. Cross

Scholarship@WashULaw

The evaluation of judges, especially circuit court judges, has commanded increased attention, with the quantitative analyses of Stephen Choi and Mitu Gulati. However, the proper dimensions for the evaluation of judges remains much disputed. Critics have challenged Choi & Gulati’s scales for measuring judicial quality but have offered little that is positive that would improve measurement. The critics make philosophical challenges to whether the measures truly capture the qualities of judging we should desire, but they offer no measurement tools to improve on Choi and Gulati.

We hope to advance the theoretical and empirical evaluation by incorporating different scales for …

The Solicitor General As Mediator Between Court And Agency, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Treaties As "Part Of Our Law", Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Judicial Independence In Excess: Reviving The Judicial Duty Of The Supreme Court, Paul D. Carrington, Roger C. Cramton

Faculty Scholarship

Independence from extrinsic influence is, we know, indispensable to public trust in the integrity of professional judges who share the duty to decide cases according to preexisting law. But such independence is less appropriate for those expected to make new law to govern future events. Indeed, in a democratic government those who make new law are expected to be accountable to their constituents, not independent of their interests and unresponsive to their desires. The Supreme Court of the United States has in the last century largely forsaken responsibility for the homely task of deciding cases in accord with preexisting law …

Justice On Appeal In Criminal Cases: A Twentieth-Century Perspective, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

Criminal appeals was a hot topic in the 1970s, reflecting the politics of the Great Society and the development of the constitutional requirements of due process. There was then widespread agreement that the function of the criminal appeal was to assure that the appropriate judges were giving visible attention to all convictions to assure that they were justified. This paper will pose the question: what has become of that vision of a former generation?

Notice Otherwise Given: Will In Absentia Trials At The Special Tribunal For Lebanon Violate Human Rights?, Chris Jenks

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

On March 1, 2009, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) commenced operations in the Netherlands. The mandate of the STL is to try those allegedly responsible for the 2005 bombing in Beirut which killed former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. A collaborative effort between Lebanon and the United Nations, the STL is to be of “international character based on the highest standards of justice.” However, the STL’s in absentia trial provisions are based on a far different, and lower, standard. This article posits that the STL’s in absentia trial provisions violate human rights norms, indeed the U.N. expressly rejected such …

Shareholders In The Jury Box: A Populist Check Against Corporate Mismanagement, Ann M. Scarlett

All Faculty Scholarship

The recent subprime mortgage disaster exposed corporate officers and directors who mismanaged their corporations, failed to exercise proper oversight, and acted in their self-interest. Two previous waves of corporate scandals in this decade revealed similar misconduct. After the initial scandals, Congress and the Securities and Exchange Commission attempted to prevent the next crisis in corporate governance through legislative and regulatory actions such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Those attempts failed. Shareholder derivative litigation has also failed because judges accord corporate executives great deference and thus rarely impose liability for breaches of fiduciary duties.

To prevent the next crisis in …

"Trap"Ing Roe In Indiana And A Common-Ground Alternative, Dawn E. Johnsen

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Public discourse over abortion overwhelmingly focuses on whether the Supreme Court will overrule Roe v. Wade and states will again ban abortion. But at least since 1992, when the Court in Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed Roe's "central holding," certain moderate- sounding abortion restrictions - sometimes framed as reasonable compromise regulations - have posed a greater threat to women's reproductive health and liberty. This Essay examines one increasingly popular form of restriction: laws that regulate providers of abortion services in the name of advancing women's health, without actual health justification. Little-noted efforts to enact such restrictions in Indiana, during the …

Alive But Not Well: Manifest Disregard After Hall Street, Kevin P. Murphy

Georgia Law Review

Arbitration is supposed to make dispute resolution faster and more cost-effective for litigants. To this end, Congress severely limited the ways in which a court can review an arbitrator's decision. But for the last fifty years courts have allowed parties an additional non statutory avenue for challenging arbitration awards. Where an arbitrator makes a decision in manifest disregard of the law, a court may vacate the award. To prove manifest disregard,parties must prove the arbitrator was aware of the law that should govern the dispute, but deliberately chose to ignore it. This often-argued, but seldom successful, claim increases the costs …

Leaving The Thicket At Last?, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Laura Jane Durfee

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Across the spectrum of ideas debated within the law of democracy, the view is nearly unanimous that the Justices must lead the way toward a better democracy. And yet, as we argue in this Essay, the Court’s handling of the problems since its initial intervention in Baker v. Carr has been nothing short of a mess. Debates in this area offer modern instances of a Court that cares little about doctrinal consistency and judicial craftsmanship, of Justices that care less about compromise and common ground and more about expressing their deeply held views about politics, democracy, and the law. In …

Insider Trading And The Gradual Demise Of Fiduciary Principles, Donna M. Nagy

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Recent SEC enforcement actions, such as the case filed against Dallas Mavericks' owner Mark Cuban, raise the question whether deception by a fiduciary is essential to the Rule 10b-5 insider trading offense. Under the Supreme Court's classical and misappropriation theories, the answer is clearly yes - each theory has a fiduciary principle at its core. Yet lower courts and the SEC frequently disregard the Court's explicit dictates, and a consensus is emerging that insider trading rests simply on the wrongful use of material nonpublic information, regardless of whether a fiduciary-like duty is breached. Although this view of insider trading can …

Judicial Activism And Fourteenth Amendment Privacy Claims: The Allure Of Originalism And The Unappreciated Promise Of Constrained Nonoriginalism, Daniel O. Conkle

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Among other meanings, "judicial activism" can be defined as judicial decisionmaking that frustrates majoritarian self-government and that is unconstrained by law. So understood, judicial activism is presumptively problematic, because it frustrates customary democratic and judicial norms.

In this essay, I address originalist and nonoriginalist responses to the presumptive problem of judicial activism in the context of Fourteenth Amendment privacy claims, including claims relating to abortion, sexual conduct, and same-sex marriage. I argue that originalism is an overrated solution, largely because current understandings of originalism, despite claims to the contrary, do not provide standards of decision that are sufficiently clear to …

The Legal And Constitutional Foundations For The District Of Columbia Judicial Branch, Steven M. Schneebaum

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keynote Address Of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, Eleanor Holmes Norton

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Who Should Appoint Judges Of The D.C. Courts?, Charles A. Miller

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Since 1970, the District of Columbia court system has been comprised of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.' From the time of the establishment of the District, judges of its courts have been appointed by the President of the United States, acting on the advice of the Attorney General. When the general issue of District home rule came before Congress in the 1960s, one of the subjects considered was the judicial appointment process. In 1970, the District of Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act 2 continued the Presidential appointment …

Organization, Budgeting, And Funding Of The District Of Columbia's Local Courts, Peter R. Kolker

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

The mechanism for funding the District of Columbia's local court system reflects the unique and complex character of the District. The means and method of budgeting for and funding this vital function has evolved over the years, reflecting the maturation of the District from its pre-Home Rule days to the present. This evolution is a reflection of the District's growing pains and financial crises, as well as the unusual symbiosis and tension between the District and the federal government. The budget system is also the product of the limitations imposed on the District's restricted taxing authority, which results in a …

The District Of Columbia's Judicial Selection Process: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, Patricia M. Worthy

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comments On Who Appoints D.C. Judges, Daniel A. Rezneck

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Thirty-Year Retrospective. Comments Of The Honorable Gregory E. Mize (Ret.), Gregory E. Mize

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prologue To District Of Columbia Democracy And The Third Branch Of Government, John W. Nields, Timothy J. May

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Why does the President of the United States appoint the judges of the District of Columbia's local court system? Why is the District of Columbia's local court system funded and overseen by the United States Congress? Why does the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia and not the Attorney General for the District of Columbia function as a local prosecutor, prosecuting most D.C. Code crimes in the District of Columbia's courts? The four essays which follow this introduction explore the rich history behind these unusual structural features of the District of Columbia government; they present the arguments for …

Should The District Of Columbia Have Responsibility For The Prosecution Of Criminal Offenses Arising Under The District Of Columbia Code?, John Payton

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Short Essay On The Editing Of Cases In Casebooks, Frank Tuerkheimer

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Where Equity Meets Expertise: Re-Thinking Appellate Review In Complex Litigation, Michael J. Hays

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The field of complex litigation continues to grow as both an academic study and a popular phenomenon. One cannot escape news accounts of major class action litigation, and lawyers continue to find new ways to push the outer bounds of civil litigation practices to accommodate large-scale disputes involving multiple claims or parties. Many question whether traditional procedures can or should apply to these cases. Drawing on this well-recognized procedural tension, this Article explores the relationship between trial and appellate courts in complex litigation and argues for a revised standard of appellate review for trial court decisions affecting the party structure …

The Myth Of The Generalist Judge, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Conventional judicial wisdom assumes and indeed celebrates the ideal of the generalist judge, but do judges really believe in it? This Article empirically tests this question by examining opinion assignments in the federal courts of appeals from 1995-2005. It reveals that opinion specialization is a regular part of circuit court practice, and that a significant number of judges specialize in specific subject areas. The Article then assesses the desirability of opinion specialization. Far from being a mere loophole, opinion specialization turns out to be an important development in judicial practice that promises to increase judicial expertise without incurring many of …

Circumventing Congress: How The Federal Courts Opened The Door To Impeaching Criminal Defendants With Prior Convictions, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

This Article spotlights the flawed analytical framework at the heart of the federal courts’ approach to one of the most controversial trial practices in American criminal jurisprudence — the admission of prior convictions to impeach the credibility of defendants who testify. As the Article explains, the flawed approach is a byproduct of the courts’ reliance on a five-factor analytical framework to implement the governing legal standard enacted by Congress in Federal Rule of Evidence 609. Tracing the evolution of the fivefactor framework from its roots in pre-Rule 609 case law, the Article demonstrates that the courts’ reinterpretation of the framework …

Reasonable Suspicion Or Real Likelihood: A Question Of Semantics? Re Shankar Alan S/O Anant Kulkarni, Lionel Leo, Siyuan Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The law on apparent bias has been mired in some controversy following the High Court decision of Re Shankar Alan s/o Anant Kulkarni, where Sundaresh Menon J.C. seemingly departed from the tentative views of Andrew Phang J.C. (as he then was) in Tang Kin Hwa v. Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board on the issue of whether there were any material differences between the “reasonable suspicion of bias” test and the “real likelihood of bias” test, the two formulations of the test for apparent bias that have been variously adopted by different jurisdictions in the common law world. In Tang Kin …

The Chesterfield/Colonial Heights Drug Court: A Partnership Between The Criminal Justice System And The Treatment Community, Hon. Frederick G. Rockwell Iii

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.