Judges Commons^™

The Contributions Of Louis Brandeis To The Law Of Lawyering, John S. Dzienkowski

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Logan On Judicial Diversity 12-09-2016, Kate Nagle, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Confirm Judge Koh For The Ninth Circuit, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

On February 25, 2016, President Barack Obama appointed United States District Court Judge Lucy Haeran Koh for a judicial emergency vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The jurist has served professionally for more than six years in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, ably resolving major litigation. Thus, White House efforts to confirm her were unsurprising. Nevertheless, 2016 is a presidential election year when delay infuses many court appointments. That conundrum was exacerbated because the United States Senate Republican majority refused to even consider United States Court of Appeals …

Evaluating Legislative Justice Sector Reforms: Creating An Environment For Survival, Lauren A. Shumate

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.

Free Speech Matters: The Roberts Court And The First Amendment, Joel M. Gora

Journal of Law and Policy

This article contends that the Roberts Court, in the period from 2006 to 2016, arguably became the most speech-protective Supreme Court in memory. In a series of wide-ranging First Amendment decisions, the Court sounded and strengthened classic free speech themes and principles. Taken together, the Roberts Court’s decisions have left free speech rights much stronger than they were found.

Those themes and principles include a strong libertarian distrust of government regulation of speech and presumption in favor of letting people control speech, a consistent refusal to fashion new “non-speech” categories, a reluctance to “balance” free speech away against governmental interests, …

Introduction; The Past, Present And Future Of Free Speech, Joel M. Gora

Journal of Law and Policy

This short paper introduces the papers and commentary produced at two significant First Amendment occasions. First was a 40^th anniversary celebration of the Supreme Court’s landmark 1976 decision in Buckley v. Valeo, the fountainhead ruling on the intersection between campaign finance restrictions and First Amendment rights. The questions were discussed provocatively by two of the leading players in that decision, James Buckley himself, now a retired United States Circuit Judge, and Ira Glasser, former head of the ACLU who helped organize a strange bedfellows, left-right coalition to challenge the new federal election campaign laws on First Amendment grounds. …

Diversity, Transparency & Inclusion In Canada’S Judiciary, Samreen Beg, Lorne Sossin

Articles & Book Chapters

The purpose of this paper is to provide a high level overview of some of the issues and stumbling blocks Canada has encountered in building a diverse judiciary. Part 1 of the paper begins by providing a brief overview of the heterogeneous makeup of Canadian society against the homogenous makeup of the judiciary. This will provide a helpful backdrop from which to explore conceptual questions related to the question of why a diverse judiciary matters. Part 2 examines some of the historical questions and milestones in the judiciary related to diversity. Part 3 summarizes the judicial appointments processes and takes …

Open Chambers Revisited: Demystifying The Inner Workings And Culture Of The Georgia Court Of Appeals, Stephen Louis A. Dillard

Mercer Law Review

I was sitting in my cluttered but comfortable office, preparing for what would ultimately be my last hearing as a lawyer, when the phone rang. On the other end of the line was Governor Sonny Perdue's executive assistant: "Mr. Dillard, do you have time to speak with the governor?" I did, of course. And less than two weeks after that brief but life-changing conversation with Governor Perdue, I was one of Georgia's two newlyappointed appellate judges (and the seventy-third judge to serve on the court of appeals since 1906).

Over six years have passed now, and during that time a …

Responding To Judicial And Lawyer Misconduct: Analyzing A Survey Of State Trial Court Judges, Peter M. Koelling

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

While reported cases or incidents may give us insight into the interpretation of Rule 2.15 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, they do not give us a sense of how often judges undertake the obligation to act under the rule. The Judicial Division of the American Bar Association developed a survey to explore the interpretation and the implementation of Rule 2.15 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, and to determine how and in what manner state trial court judges responded to ethical violations by lawyers and other judges. The survey looked back over a ten-year period and was …

Maximinimalism, Jamal Greene

Cardozo Law Review

The article explores Chief Justice John Roberts' judicial approach, characterizing it as "maximinimalism"—a blend of narrow decision-making with deep, impactful reasoning. While Roberts is often seen as a minimalist for his emphasis on deciding cases narrowly, his rulings in significant cases like Citizens United v. FEC, Shelby County v. Holder, and NFIB v. Sebelius reveal a deeper, more substantive approach that challenges the law, thus embodying maximalist tendencies. This duality allows the Court to influence the law profoundly while maintaining judicial restraint.

The Court Of Appeals As The Middle Child, Raymond Lohier

Fordham Law Review

It’s said that middle children are most likely to be forgotten in the chaos of family life. The same could be said of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, which in 2016, mark their 125th anniversary, and which are the middle child of the federal judicial family. As too few people, even academics, know, the courts of appeals were created in 1891 by the Evarts Act, more than a century after the Constitution and the First Judiciary Act. The history of the courts of appeals has accordingly hovered somewhat uneasily next to that of the U.S. Supreme Court and the district …

Building A Bench: A Close Look At State Appellate Courts Constructed By The Respective Methods Of Judicial Selection, Diane M. Johnsen

San Diego Law Review

This Article analyzes detailed career-path and other demographic data to determine the extent to which the various judicial selection methods advance diverse candidates to the bench. The results show many similaritiesamong the mix of objective characteristics found on appellate benches across the states, regardless of selection method, but there are some important differences ... Part I discusses the history of judicial selection in the states and reviews the prior empirical and theoretical literature concerning judicial selection methods and the differences among judges produced by those selection methods, mainly with respect to gender, race, and localism. Part II identifies the data …

Online Training For Judicial Officers And Court Personnel, Morgan Patten

Master of Education in Instructional Design and Technology Plan II Graduate Projects

The purpose of this project was to create two online, asynchronous courses: one on domestic violence for judicial officers and one on community supervision of sex offenders for probation and parole officers. These courses will be offered to the court community through the Supreme Court of Ohio Judicial College, which is responsible for providing education to judicial officers, court personnel, and others who serve the judiciary.

These courses were developed in consultation with Supreme Court of Ohio staff, judicial officers, and other subject matter experts. These experts evaluated the courses on at least three occasions and provided substantive feedback. Once …

Why Judicial Deference To Administrative Fact-Finding Is Unconstitutional, John Gibbons

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

On The Place Of Judge-Made Law In A Government Of Laws, Matthew J. Steilen

Journal Articles

This essay explores a constitutional account of the elevation of the judiciary in American states following the Revolution. The core of the account is a connection between two fundamental concepts in Anglo-American constitutional thinking, discretion and a government of laws. In the periods examined here, arbitrary discretion tended to be associated with alien power and heteronomy, while bounded discretion was associated with self-rule. The formal, solemn, forensic, and public character of proceedings in courts of law suggested to some that judge-made law (a product of judicial discretion under these proceedings) did not express simply the will of the judge or …

“Government By Injunction,” Legal Elites, And The Making Of The Modern Federal Courts, Kristin Collins

Faculty Scholarship

The tendency of legal discourse to obscure the processes by which social and political forces shape the law’s development is well known, but the field of federal courts in American constitutional law may provide a particularly clear example of this phenomenon. According to conventional accounts, Congress’s authority to regulate the lower federal courts’ “jurisdiction”—generally understood to include their power to issue injunctions— has been a durable feature of American constitutional law since the founding. By contrast, the story I tell in this essay is one of change. During the nineteenth century and into the twentieth, many jurists considered the federal …

Newsroom: Margulies Cited On Military Commissions 11-04-2016, Peter S. Margulies

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Unconventional Methods For A Traditional Setting: The Use Of Virtual Reality To Reduce Implicit Racial Bias In The Courtroom, Natalie Salmanowitz

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

The presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial lie at the core of the United States justice system. While existing rules and practices serve to uphold these principles, the administration of justice is significantly compromised by a covert but influential factor: namely, implicit racial biases. These biases can lead to automatic associations between race and guilt, as well as impact the way in which judges and jurors interpret information throughout a trial. Despite the well-documented presence of implicit racial biases, few steps have been taken to ameliorate the problem in the courtroom setting. This Article discusses the …

A Tribute To The Honorable Lynn A. Battaglia, Mary Ellen Barbera, Andrea Leahy, Thomas E. Lynch Iii, William L. Reynolds

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Tribute To The Honorable Glenn T. Harrell, Jr., Mary Ellen Barbera, James A. Kenney Iii, Steven I. Platt, Robert A. Zarnoch

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Clark Memorandum: Fall 2016, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Byu Law School Alumni Association, J. Reuben Clark Law Society

The Clark Memorandum

• To Shoot the Moon: A Conversation with D. Gordon Smith, Eighth Dean of the BYU Law School
• The Lord is Good to Me: Thoughts on Humility, Gratitude, and Happiness (Kent A. Jordan)
• Think About It: The Value of Law School (Ruth Lybbert Renlund)
• A Wyoming Cowgirl's Path to the Bench (M. Margaret McKeown)

Grow Up Virginia: Time To Change Our Filial Responsibility Law, Sylvia Macon

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Amendment Creep, Jonathan L. Marshfield

Michigan Law Review

To most lawyers and judges, constitutional amendment rules are nothing more than the technical guidelines for changing a constitution’s text. But amendment rules contain a great deal of substance that can be relevant to deciding myriad constitutional issues. Indeed, judges have explicitly drawn on amendment rules when deciding issues as far afield as immigration, criminal procedure, free speech, and education policy. The Supreme Court, for example, has reasoned that, because Article V of the U.S. Constitution places no substantive limitations on formal amendment, the First Amendment must protect even the most revolutionary political viewpoints. At the state level, courts have …

Issue 1: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Memoriam: Justice Antonin Scalia And The Constitution's Golden Thread, L. Margaret Harker

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Brittani Mulholland's Post: Women In Robes: Bigger And Better Than Ever: October 12, 2016, Brittani Mulholland

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Note: Canons Of Judicial Ethics - Extra Judicial Activities

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

If appellate advocates could hear from courts about topics that might be raised during oral argument—as opposed to relying solely on their ability to anticipate the issues—might their answers be better? That seems likely, but it is unlikely that research could confirm that, as judicial practice overwhelmingly favors impromptu questioning. Spontaneity may be harmless if the question was predictable, or unavoidable if a judge just thought of the question. But sometimes advocates have to answer challenging questions concerning the law, facts, or implications of a position—questions that help decide the case, either due to the quality of the answer or …

The First Amendment And The Police In The Digital Age, Kermit V. Lipez

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Distinctive Role Of Justice Samuel Alito: From A Politics Of Restoration To A Politics Of Dissent, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

Justice Samuel Alito is regarded by both his champions and his critics as the most consistently conservative member of the current Supreme Court. Both groups seem to agree that he has become the most important conservative voice on the Court. Chief Justice John Roberts has a Court to lead; Justice Antonin Scalia and his particular brand of originalism have passed on; Justice Clarence Thomas is a stricter originalist and so writes opinions that other Justices do not join; and Justice Anthony Kennedy can be ideologically unreliable. Justice Alito, by contrast, is unburdened by the perceived responsibilities of being Chief Justice, …