Judges Commons^™

Diverse And Inclusive High Courts: A Global And Intersectional Perspective, Alice J. Kang, Miki Caul Kittilson, Valerie Hoekstra, Maria C. Escobar-Lemmon

Department of Political Science: Faculty Publications

Critical race feminists call attention to the ways in which multiple and overlapping forms of privilege and discrimination shape individual experiences and perspectives. In this article, we argue that judiciaries cannot be fully inclusive if their composition does not reflect a society’s intersecting sources of disadvantage. We consider intersectional inclusion on high courts from a compar-ative perspective. Most existing practices of representation on high courts promote the inclusion of groups as if they are internally homogenous. We explore the attempts at and successes of promoting intersectional inclusion in the context of the high courts of Canada and South Africa. Although …

What's The Difference Between A Conclusion And A Fact?, Howard M. Erichson

Faculty Scholarship

In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, building on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court instructed district courts to treat a complaint’s conclusions differently from allegations of fact. Facts, but not conclusions, are assumed true for purposes of a motion to dismiss. The Court did little to help judges or lawyers understand this elusive distinction, and, indeed, obscured the distinction with its language. The Court said it was distinguishing “legal conclusions” from factual allegations. The application in Twombly and Iqbal, however, shows that the relevant distinction is not between law and fact, but rather between different types of factual assertions. This …

Muted Justice, Leah Litman

Articles

The Chief Justice of the United States possesses significant power. His position as the senior most Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court allows him to assign opinions to other Justices and to coordinate scheduling the Court’s cases for argument. And after Justice Kennedy retired in June 2018, Chief Justice Roberts was the median Justice on the Court, whose vote often determined the outcome in a case. Even after Justice Barrett’s confirmation changed that state of affairs, the Chief remains an important Justice to watch.

The Politics Of Regulating And Disciplining Judges In Nigeria, Olabisi D. Akinkugbe

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The disciplining of judges is a sensitive and complex challenge. In Nigeria, the complexity is heightened because the process is complicated by socio-political factors and public views about the motivations for disciplining some judges, including claims of political interference by the ruling government. This Chapter argues that both judicial discipline and the work of the National Judicial Council (NJC) – the body responsible for judicial regulation in Nigeria – are caught up within Nigeria’s peculiar socio-politics, a reality that a strictly legal analysis will miss. The Chapter analyzes contemporary challenges and controversies associated with the complaints and discipline procedure in …

(What We Talk About When We Talk About) Judicial Temperament, Terry A. Maroney

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Judicial temperament is simultaneously the thing we think all judges must have and the thing that no one can quite put a finger on. Extant accounts are scattered and thin, and either present a laundry list of desirable judicial qualities without articulating what (if anything) unifies the list or treat temperament as a fundamentally mysterious quality that a judge either does or does not have. Resting so much—selection, evaluation, discipline, even removal—on such an indeterminate concept is intellectually and practically intolerable. Polarized debates over Justice Kavanaugh’s fitness to sit on the Supreme Court made clear just how badly we need …

The Belloni Decision: A Foundation For The Northwest Fisheries Cases, The National Tribal Sovereignty Movement, And An Understanding Of The Rule Of Law, Charles Wilkinson

Publications

Judge Belloni’s decision in United States v. Oregon, handed down a half-century ago, has been given short shrift by lawyers, historians, and other commentators on the modern revival of Indian treaty fishing rights in the Pacific Northwest. The overwhelming amount of attention has been given to Judge Boldt’s subsequent decision in United States v. Washington and the Passenger Vessel ruling by the Supreme Court affirming Judge Boldt. I’m one who has been guilty of that.

We now can see that United States v. Oregon was the breakthrough. In those early days, Judge Belloni showed deep understanding of the two …

Can The International Criminal Court Succeed? An Analysis Of The Empirical Evidence Of Violence Prevention, Stuart Ford

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

Despite significant optimism about the future of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) during its early years, recently there has been growing criticism of it by both scholars and governments. As a result, there appears to be more doubt about the ICC’s ability to succeed now than at any other point in its history. So, are the critics correct? Is the ICC failing? No. This Article argues that, not only can the ICC succeed, there is strong evidence that it is already succeeding. It analyzes several recent empirical articles that have convincingly demonstrated that the ICC prevents serious violations of international …

Experiments With Suppression: The Evolution Of Repressive Legality In Britain In The Revolutionary Period, Christopher M. Roberts

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

This article is concerned with the structure of repressive governance, and how it has evolved historically. It examines this theme through an exploration of the manner which repressive laws and institutions evolved in Britain over the course of the late eighteenth century. In particular, it reviews the various measures that British authorities utilized and relied upon in order to confront a growing wave of calls for social and political reforms. These included a policy of aggressive prosecutions of dissidents; the creation of new institutions such as the Home Office designed to enhance the powers of the central authorities; extralegal measures …

#Sowhitemale: Federal Procedural Rulemaking Committees, Brooke D. Coleman

Faculty Articles

Of the 630 members of a specialized set of committees responsible for drafting the federal rules for civil and criminal litigation, 591 of them have been white. That is 94 percent of the committee membership. Of that same group, 513—or 81 percent—have been white men. Decisionmaking bodies do better work when their members are diverse; these rulemaking committees are no exception. The Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure are not mere technical instructions, nor are they created by a neutral set of experts. To the contrary, the Rules embody normative judgments about what values trump others, and the rulemakers—while experts—are …

Say “No” To Discrimination, “Yes” To Accommodation: Why States Should Prohibit Discrimination Of Workers Who Use Cannabis For Medical Purposes, Anne Marie Lofaso, Lakyn D. Cecil

Seattle University Law Review

This Article addresses the question of how the law should treat medical cannabis in the employment context. Using Colorado as a primary example, we argue that states such as Colorado should amend their constitutions and legislate to provide employment protections for employees who are registered medical cannabis cardholders or registered caregivers.

Part I briefly traces the legal regulation of cannabis from an unregulated medicine known as cannabis to a highly regulated illicit substance known as marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. Our travail through this history reveals, unsurprisingly, an increasing demonization of cannabis throughout the twentieth century. That socio-legal demonization …

Thin Separability: An Answer To Star Athletica, Angelo Marchesini

Seattle University Law Review

Courts have consistently struggled to adopt a test that appropriately interprets the Copyright Act’s language protecting works of art incorporated into useful articles. The analysis that allows protections of these works of art is called “separability,” and it has been an ambiguous area of copyright law since its inception. In essence, this analysis gives copyright protection to a work of art incorporated into a useful article as long as the work of art is “separate” from the utilitarian aspects of the useful article. The Supreme Court was positioned to end the uncertainty surrounding the separability analysis in its recent decision, …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Judicial Credibility, Bert I. Huang

Faculty Scholarship

Do people believe a federal court when it rules against the government? And does such judicial credibility depend on the perceived political affiliation of the judge? This study presents a survey experiment addressing these questions, based on a set of recent cases in which both a judge appointed by President George W. Bush and a judge appointed by President Bill Clinton declared the same Trump Administration action to be unlawful. The findings offer evidence that, in a politically salient case, the partisan identification of the judge – here, as a “Bush judge” or “Clinton judge” – can influence the credibility …

The Shadow Judiciary, Charlotte S. Alexander, Nathan Dahlberg, Anne M. Tucker

Scholarly Works

Magistrate judges function as a shadow judiciary, assisting U.S. district court judges-and sometimes standing in their shoes-in managing caseloads, resolving disputes, making law, and choosing winners and losers. Yet we lack basic knowledge about magistrates themselves, the rules that govern their activity, and the ways in which they execute their duties. To fill those gaps, this Article offers a detailed typology of the district-level local rules and standing orders that govern magistrate operations in civil cases. It also describes a case study of ten years of magistrate practice in a single federal district court, the U.S. District Court for the …

Filling The Federal District Court Vacancies, Carl Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

"President Donald Trump’s major success has been confirming judges for the thirteen federal appellate courts. The President shattered records by appointing a dozen circuit jurists in his administration’s first year, eighteen judges over the course of 2018, and twenty additional judges throughout his third year. Indeed, by June 2019, the appeals courts experienced four vacancies in 179 judgeships and today, only one position remains empty. This achievement is critical, as these tribunals are the courts of last resort for nearly every appeal, and appellate court opinions articulate greater policy than district court rulings and cover multiple states.

However, that accomplishment …

With Gratitute From Our Daughters: Reflecting On Justice Ginsburg And United States V. Virginia, Meredith Johnson Harbach

Law Faculty Publications

“What enabled me to take part in the effort to free our daughters and sons to achieve whatever their talents equipped them to accomplish, with no artificial barriers blocking their way?”

—Ruth Bader Ginsburg

On September 18, 2020, we mourned the loss of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whom many considered not just a cultural icon, but a national treasure. Among many other things, Justice Ginsburg became a later-in-life feminist “rock star,” celebrated for her rousing and impassioned dissents, her fearless defense of equality and autonomy rights, her championing of civil rights, and her persistent determination in the face of injustice. …

Faulty Forensics: Bolstering Judicial Gatekeeping In Georgia Courts, Miranda S. Bidinger

Georgia Law Review

Forensic evidence is widely used in criminal cases
across the country and is accorded great weight by
juries. But critics have begun to question its reliability.
Its use has contributed to numerous wrongful
convictions, and though some individuals have been
exonerated, many remain incarcerated for crimes they
did not commit.
This Note explores a variety of forensic science
disciplines and their associated problems, the recent
push for forensic reform, and the current standards
governing the admissibility of forensic evidence at the
federal level and in Georgia courts, highlighting the
lenient standard embodied in the Georgia Code and
elaborated upon in …

Better By The Dozen: Bringing Back The Twelve-Person Civil Jury, Steven Gensler, Lee Rosenthal, Patrick Higginbotham

Other Faculty Publications

A jury of 12 resonates through the centuries. Twelve-person juries were a fixture from at least the 14th century until the 1970s. Over 600 years of history is a powerful endorsement. So too are the many social-science studies consistently showing that a 12-person jury makes for a better deliberative process, with more predictable (and fewer outlier) results, by a more diverse group that is a more representative cross-section of the community. And yet, most federal judges today routinely seat civil juries without the full complement of 12 members. Why? Because in 1973 the United States Supreme Court said it was …

Judging Judicial Appointment Procedures, S. I. Strong

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Over the last several years, judicial appointment procedures in the United States have become increasingly intractable. Members of both parties are seen to engage in political gamesmanship, calling the legitimacy of the appointment process into question and decreasing public confidence in both the legislature and the judiciary. Questions are even beginning to arise about whether and to what extent the United States is complying with the rule of law.

Although numerous solutions have been proposed, one alternative has not yet been considered: international law. As paradoxical as it may seem, the best and perhaps only feasible solution to quintessentially domestic …

Standing, Still? The Evolution Of The Doctrine Of Standing In The American And Israeli Judiciaries: A Comparative Perspective, Joshua Hoyt

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The doctrine of standing plays an important role in limiting the classes of cases or controversies that are appropriate for judicial resolution; considered with other justiciability doctrines, judicial standing necessarily reflects the broader role of the court in society. Though the American judiciary had rather generous standing policies in place at the time of the founding, with the rise of the administrative state in the aftermath of the New Deal, progressive justices saw fit to restrict judicial standing as a means of insulating regulatory programs from industry challenge. In contradistinction, the young Israeli society has some of the most accessible …

Table Of Contents

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Employment Law: Sexual Harassment Law After The Norm Cascade, Joan C. Williams, Jodi Short

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Notable Faculty Publications In 2019

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure: Plaintiff Personal Jurisdiction And Venue Transfer, Scott Dodson

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law: Symmetric Constitutionalism, Zachary S. Price

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Copyright Law: Statutory Damages In The Digital Age Of Copyright Law, Ben Depoorter

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Foreword, Edward J. Davila The Honorable

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure: Beyond Bias In Diversity Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

International Law: Immunities Of Foreign Officials From Civil Jurisdiction, Chimene I. Keitner

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Health Law: Why Anti-Vaccine Claims About Nvicp Cases Are Wrong, Dorit Reiss

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.