Judges Commons^™

A Conversation On Ethics & The Law With The Honorable Ruth Pickholz, Cardozo Criminal Law Society

2025–2026 Flyers

Retired Justice of the Supreme Court, New York City County.

Standard Textualism, James A. Macleod

Articles

For as long as legal scholars have been writing about the rules-versus-standards distinction, textualism has been understood to produce characteristically rule-like law. This Article argues for the opposite view. Far from generating the “law of rules” that Scalia famously envisioned, the rule of modern textualism produces a law of standards—much more so than anybody, proponent of textualism or critic, appears to have recognized.

Two aspects of today’s textualism produce this result. The first is its emphasis on ordinary language and communication. Modern textualism typically produces standards because ordinary language and communication are typically standard-like. The second is modern textualism’s drive …

Civil Appeals Mediation Program 2024 Mediation Colloquy: 50 Years Of Building Bridges Through Appellate Mediation

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

On December 17, 2024, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and its CAMP program hosted Justice Sotomayor to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the establishment of CAMP. During the Colloquy, the 50th Anniversary CAMP documentary video was premiered.

Conservative Caution V. Progressive Originalism: How Justices Barrett And Jackson Are Paving Their Own Paths On The Court, David Rudenstine, Michael Waldman, Eric Freedman, Haiyun Damon-Feng, William D. Araiza, Mark Anthony Frassetto, Jake Meiseles, Michael Pollack, Linda Greenhouse, Earl M. Maltz

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The Conservative Caution v. Progressive Originalism symposium, hosted by the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice on March 7, 2025, brings together leading constitutional scholars to examine the emerging judicial philosophies of Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Through three expert panels—presidential immunity, gun rights, and judicial ideology—the symposium analyzes how both Justices are shaping contemporary originalist discourse from opposing ends of the ideological spectrum. Panelists explore the Supreme Court’s watershed decision in Trump v. United States (2024), emphasizing its unprecedented expansion of presidential immunity and its implications for separation of powers and democratic accountability. Discussions …

Intuitions In Tort Law And Theory, James A. Macleod

Articles

This Essay highlights the many ways that ordinary conceptual and moral intuitions shape the development of tort law. It further argues that, for a range of doctrinal and institutional reasons, such intuitions deserve a central place in tort theorists’ efforts to explain, predict, justify, and reform the law of torts. Finally, given the stakes for both positive and normative tort theory, the Essay emphasizes the need for more systematic empirical research into the content and operation of people’s tort-relevant intuitions.

Notice Pleading’S Quiet Return, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

Fifteen years ago, the Supreme Court announced two significant civil procedure decisions – Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009). Together, Iqbal and Twombly marked a new approach to pleading in federal courts. No longer would courts apply the forgiving notice pleading standard, in force since the 1938 adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In its place, the Court introduced plausibility pleading, inviting district courts to apply their “judicial experience and common sense” to decide whether a claim was “plausible.” Commentators expressed alarm, predicting that the new standard …

Doubting Thomas And Questioning Stare Decisis Under The Roberts Court, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

Articles

The article critically examines the erosion of stare decisis under the Roberts Court, highlighting concerns about the Supreme Court's increasing willingness to overturn established precedents. While acknowledging the importance of stare decisis in maintaining stability and equality, the author argues that its practical value is being undermined by ideological polarization and a departure from traditional legal reasoning. The article questions the Court's recent approach to precedent, particularly in cases like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and critiques the conservative majority's aggressive use of judicial power.

Join Us For A Conversation With Judge Matthew Solomson: Building A Legal Career, Rising To The Bench, And Defending American Values, Cardozo Federalist Society, Matthew H. Solomson

2024–2025 Flyers

No abstract provided.

It Takes A Special Person To Raise A Special Needs Child: How New York's Existing Family Regulation Systems Are Not Equipped For Children With Autism, Alexandra Debenedictis

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that New York's current family regulation systems, including the Family Court Act (FCA) and the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS), are inadequately equipped to protect children with autism in foster care. These systems fail to address the unique needs of autistic children, leading to increased vulnerability to abuse, neglect, and prolonged stays in foster care. The note proposes reforms to improve monitoring, education, and resource accessibility to better safeguard these children.

Music, Mayhem, And A Mississippi: Still Burning-The Hope Of Smothering The Deleterious Effects Of Deliberate Indifference, Angela Dixon

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that the deliberate indifference standard, as applied in Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, fails to adequately address inhumane and unconstitutional prison conditions, particularly in Mississippi. It critiques the standard for prioritizing prison officials' intent over objective conditions, allowing systemic neglect and racial disparities to persist. The analysis advocates for a shift toward an objective standard to better protect human dignity and hold prison administrators accountable.

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

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

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 …

Rulers, Victims, Educators, Or Partners? Judges' Perception Of Their Relationship With Lawyers, Boaz Shnoor, Eyal Katvan

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

Judges oftenface lawyer misbehavior in court. Such misbehavior, and the way judges address it, are pressing issues, which challenge all courts. However, the current literature on the legal profession and legal education lacks a systemic analysis of judges' perceptions of lawyers' behavior in their courtrooms, of the ways in which judges are influenced by lawyers' misbehavior, and of the ways in which they respond to it. This Article fills this gap by empirically analyzing judges' perceptions of lawyers' misbehavior, how it influences judges' work environments, the methods they use to cope with it, and the constraints they face in dealing …

Bias Notification Duty, Eldar Haber, Shai Stern

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

Algorithms are often tainted with bias that could negatively affect subjects' lives in many aspects. But while policymakers and scholars tend to focus their attention on methods to fix the bias within the algorithm or its output, they neglect a crucial piece of the puzzle: when companies discover bias and fix it in the algorithmic output, they do so behind the scenes. While such a move might debias the output, society remains in the dark about its existence or how it might have affected the outcome. Society thus misses a unique opportunity to study social and cognitive biases that shape …

A Comparative Law Guide To A Post-Dobbs America, James Hart, Flore Foulon

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, which overturned *Roe v. Wade* and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, necessitates a federal legislative solution to restore abortion rights. Drawing on France's civil law system, the article proposes a clear, comprehensive federal law that guarantees absolute abortion rights pre-viability and includes safeguards post-viability. It emphasizes the need for consistency and clarity, similar to France's approach, to address the legal void left by *Dobbs* and ensure uniform protections across all U.S. states.

A More Perfect Union For Whom?, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud

Articles

Amending the federal Constitution has been instrumental in creating and developing the North American constitutional project. The difficult process embedded in Article V has been used by “The People” to expand rights and democracy, fix procedural deficiencies, and even overturn Supreme Court precedent. Yet, it is no secret that the amendment process has fallen to the wayside and that a constitutional amendment in our present age of extreme political polarization feels impossible.

Our nation’s history suggests otherwise. In John F. Kowal and Wilfred U. Codrington III’s exciting and inspirational new book, they explain that interest in constitutional amendments has coincided …

Power And Persuasion In The Courtroom: The Force Of Law And The Settlement Dynamics Of Judges, Hadas Cohen, Michal Alberstein

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

This Article seeks to describe the shift in the legitimation of judicial authority in the age of the "vanishing trial," in circumstances where adjudication on the merits of the case in question has been replaced by the promotion ofjudicial settlement. Based on data collected during a five-year study funded by the European Research Council ("ERC") and drawing from studies in social psychology and conflict resolution, we analyze the judicial conflict resolution practices used in Israel's Magistrate Court in Tel Aviv to promote settlement, and from this depict a new taxonomy of power relations in the courtroom. This move, from adjudication …

The Due Process Owed To Noncitizens: Standardizing The Burden In Sec. 1226(A) Bond Hearings With The Help Of Hernandez-Lara And Velasco Lopez, Sharon Shaji

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Management’S Substantive Edges, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

The article examines the evolution of judicial management in federal courts since Judith Resnik's seminal work, *Managerial Judges*, highlighting both advancements and persistent challenges. While increased transparency and the expanded role of magistrate judges have mitigated some concerns, issues like discovery disputes and the impact of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) continue to shape judicial practice. The article critiques the disuniformity introduced by judges' individual standing orders, which, despite offering flexibility, raise concerns about procedural fairness, transparency, and consistency in federal procedure.

The Coming Copyright Judge Crisis, Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Dave Fagundes

Articles

Commentary about the Supreme Court's 2021 decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. has focused on the nexus between patent and administrative law. But this overlooks the decision's seismic and as-yet unappreciated implication for copyright law: Arthrex renders the Copyright Royalty Board ("CRB") unconstitutional. The CRB has suffered constitutional challenge since its 2004 inception, but these were seemingly resolved in 2011 when the D.C. Circuit held that the CRB's composition did not offend the Appointments Clause as long as Copyright Royalty Judges ("CRJs") were removable atwill. But when the Court invalidated the selection process for administrative patent judges on a …

Zoned In: How Residence Restrictions Lead To The Indefinite And Unconstitutional Detention Of New Yorkers Convicted Of Sex Crimes, Rebecca Tunis

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Despite the New York Court of Appeals majority holding in People ex rel. Johnson, New York’s policy of detaining individuals beyond their maximum sentence because they are unable to procure SARA-compliant housing is plainly unconstitutional. The policy violates sex offenders’ fundamental right to be released from prison after serving their sentence. Further, the policy fails to meet even the most relaxed form of judicial review because the state has not shown that it benefits public safety. Indeed, there is virtually no evidence proving that this policy serves to protect the public at all, and a growing body of research shows …

Beyond Problem-Solving Courts, Erin R. Collins

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

Problem-solving courts were borne out of well-meaning experimentalist spirit, a spirit that is very much in line with the vision of this Symposium on the multi-door criminal courthouse. These courts, which include drug courts, mental health courts, veterans' courts, and many other specialized criminal courts, were created as a way to close one door to the criminal courthouse-the so-called "revolving door" that appeared to bring some people accused of crimes back into court as soon as they exited. Problem-solving court judges sought to open a different door for some of those who entered their courtrooms, a door that they hoped …

The Unchosen: Procedural Fairness In Criminal Specialty Court Selection, Shanda K. Sibley

Cardozo Law Review

Specialized criminal courts were created in an effort to offer nonpunitive responses to the commission of crime. The promise of these courts was that they would remove select populations from the traditional legal system and offer them something different, and perhaps better, than mere punishment and incapacitation.

However, the current selection processes for specialized courts—in which judges and prosecutors have almost completely unfettered discretion to decide both the criteria by which potential participants will be allowed to participate and whether any individual defendant meets such criteria—perverts the notion of providing specialized services to specific populations. Instead of selecting defendants based …

Judges, Judging And Otherwise: Do We Ask Too Much Of State Court Judges - Or Not Enough?, Michael C. Pollack

Articles

Ask the average person to imagine what a judge does, and the answer will most likely be something right out of a courtroom from Law & Order — or Legally Blonde, Just Mercy, My Cousin Vinny, Kramer vs. Kramer, or any of the myriad law-themed movies and television shows. A judge is faced with a dispute brought by some parties and their lawyers and is charged with resolving it, whether it be a breach of contract, a tort action, a competing claim over property, a disagreement about the meaning of a statute, some accusation that someone …

Law In, Law Out: Legalistic Filter Bubbles And The Algorithmic Prevention Of Nonconsensual Pornography, Daniel Maggen

Cardozo Law Review

In 2019, Facebook announced that it had begun using machine-learning algorithms to preemptively screen uploads for nonconsensual pornography. Although the use of screening algorithms has become commonplace, this seemingly minor move from reactive to preemptive legal analysis–based prevention—this Article argues—is part of a groundbreaking shift in the meaning and effect of algorithmic screening, with potentially far-reaching implications for legal discourse and development.

To flush out the meaning of this shift, the Article draws on the filter bubble theory. Thus far, the phenomenon of filter bubbles has been synonymous with personalized filtering and the social polarization and radicalization it is prone …

Leveling The Playing Field In Custody Proceedings In New York City Family Court: Enforcing The Rights Of All Parents To Notice And An Unbiased Opportunity To Enforce Their Fundamental Right To Parent Their Child, Dana Gambardella

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that the Administration for Children's Services (ACS) in New York City systematically fails to notify non-respondent fathers, particularly Black fathers, of their rights and opportunities to participate in child welfare proceedings. This practice violates their fundamental constitutional right to parent and disproportionately affects low-income Black families, perpetuating racial and economic disparities in the child welfare system. The note advocates for systemic reforms, including increased accountability for ACS and the establishment of a private right of action for aggrieved parents.

The Roberts Court's Transformative Religious Freedom Cases: The Doctrine And The Politics Of Grievance, Stephen M. Feldman

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that the Roberts Court has adopted a conservative approach in religious freedom cases, shifting toward a jurisprudence that favors Christianity and undermines the separation of church and state. This approach, rooted in tradition and a de facto Christian America, has led to significant changes in both Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause doctrines. The Court's decisions increasingly protect Christian practices and institutions while marginalizing non-Christian religions, reflecting a broader ideological shift toward judicial engagement and away from principles of federalism and judicial restraint.

Inherent Judicial Authority: A Study In Creative Ambiguity, Charles M. Yablon

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporate Capital & Legal Personality: A Marxist Account Of Citizens United Ten Years Later, Hayden E. Pendergrass

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article presents a Marxist critique of the Citizens United decision, arguing that it embodies the dominant capitalist ideology by granting corporations extensive First Amendment rights. This decision reflects the legal system's role in reinforcing corporate power and control over the political process, aligning with Marxist theories of law as a tool of class domination.

The Iron Rule, Jacob Bronsther, Guha Krishnamurthi

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Bolt Of Lightning: Measuring The Impact Of Modern Transitions On The Supreme Court, Daniel Kiel

Cardozo Law Review

Lightning struck on September 18, 2020. In a year in which so many unimaginable events had unfolded and were unfolding, the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg sent shock waves not only through the nation’s legal community, but throughout the country. Ginsburg, a champion of women’s rights as both lawyer and Justice, the multi-time survivor of cancer, the Court’s tiny, surprising, and notorious rock star, passed away at a precarious moment. Aside from the existential challenge presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, the nation was 46 days from a presidential election. Given that the responsibility of nominating Supreme Court Justices fell …