Judges Commons^™

Active Judging And Access To Justice, Anna E. Carpenter

Notre Dame Law Review

“Being a good judge in this environment means unlearning what you learned in law school about what a judge is supposed to do. Fairness is doing things a federal judge would never do.”

Active judging, where judges step away from the traditional, passive role to assist those without counsel, is a central feature of recent proposals aimed at solving the pro se crisis in America’s state civil courts. Despite growing support for active judging as an access to justice intervention, we know little, empirically, about how judges interact with pro se parties as a general matter, and even less about …

Substantive Due Process And The Politicization Of The Supreme Court, Eric Millman

CMC Senior Theses

Substantive due process is one of the most cherished and elusive doctrines in American constitutional jurisprudence. The understanding that the Constitution of the United States protects not only specifically enumerated rights, but also broad concepts such as “liberty,” “property,” and “privacy,” forms the foundation for some of the Supreme Court’s most impactful—and controversial—decisions.

This thesis explores the constitutional merits and politicizing history of natural rights jurisprudence from its application in Dred Scott v. Sandford to its recent evocation in Obergefell v. Hodges. Indeed, from slavery to same-same sex marriage, substantive due process has played a pivotal role in shaping …

Judicial Audiences: A Case Study Of Justice David Watt's Literary Judgments, Elaine Craig

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Applicants to the federal judiciary identify three main audiences for their decisions: the involved and affected parties, the public, and the legal profession. This case study examines a set of decisions authored by Justice David Watt of the Ontario Court of Appeal, involving the rape, torture, murder or attempted murder of women, in which he attempts humour or uses puns, parody, stark imagery and highly stylized and colloquial language to introduce the violence, or factual circumstances surrounding the violence, in these cases. It assess these introductions in relation to the audiences judges have identified as important for their decisions. The …

Judicial Conflicts And Voting Agreement: Evidence From Interruptions At Oral Argument, Tonja Jacobi, Kyle Rozema

Faculty Articles

This Article asks whether observable conflicts between Supreme Court justices—interruptions between the justices during oral arguments—can predict breakdowns in voting outcomes that occur months later. To answer this question, we built a unique dataset based on the transcripts of Supreme Court oral arguments and justice votes in cases from 1960 to 2015. We find that on average a judicial pair is seven percent less likely to vote together in a case for each interruption that occurs between them in the oral argument for that case. While a conflict between the justices that leads to both interruptions and a breakdown in …

Diversity, Tenure, And Dissent, Joanna Shepherd

Faculty Articles

Although academics have long recognized that institutions such as opinion-assignment procedures and voting order might influence the propensity to dissent, empirical studies have failed to consider the impact of collegiality and personal relationships on dissent rates. Thus, in this short Essay, I empirically test whether some of the judges’ assertions are consistent with the data. I test whether various measures of diversity are associated with dissent rates in state supreme courts. I find that diversity in many areas—gender, race, age, religion, home state, and political affiliation—is associated with higher levels of dissent. In contrast, diversity in the jobs that judges …

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

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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.

Keeping Up With Your Sister Court: Unpublished Memorandums, No-Citation Rules, And The Superior Court Of Pennsylvania, Logan Hetherington

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

As Pennsylvania’s intermediate appellate court of general jurisdiction, the Pennsylvania Superior Court decides thousands of cases each year. The vast majority of those cases are disposed of via unpublished memorandums. These unpublished memorandums are designated as non-precedential and may not be cited by parties before the Superior Court. As a result, litigants and their counsel may not even persuasively cite an unpublished memorandum in briefs or other papers submitted to the Court. Thus, if counsel finds an unpublished memorandum deciding the identical issue of the case at hand and counsel is before the Superior Court judge who authored that opinion, …

Forum: What’S The Matter With The Supreme Court?, Michael Klarman, Nadine Strossen, Eli Noam, Sanford Levinson, Mark Tushnet

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

Plata O Plomo: Effect Of Mexican Transnational Criminal Organizations On The American Criminal Justice System, Mark M. Mcpherson

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Law Library Blog (January 2018): Legal Beagle's Blog Archive, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

In Memory Of Roderick Glen Ayers, Jr. (1947–2017), Professor Of Law, St. Mary's University School Of Law, Craig A. Gargotta, William R. "Dick" Davis Jr.

St. Mary's Law Journal

On September 27, 2017, Glen Ayers, a former professor at St. Mary’s School of Law, passed away suddenly and unexpectedly. Two St. Mary's alumni—Bankruptcy Judge Craig A. Gargotta (1989) and William R. “Dick” Davis, Jr. (1983)—have provided this tribute to an icon of San Antonio’s bankruptcy bar.

Studying The "New" Civil Judges, Anna E. Carpenter, Jessica K. Steinberg, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark

Faculty Scholarship

We know very little about the people and institutions that make up the bulk of the United States civil justice system: state judges and state courts. Our understanding of civil justice is based primarily on federal litigation and the decisions of appellate judges. Staggeringly little legal scholarship focuses on state courts and judges. We simply do not know what most judges are doing in their day-to-day courtroom roles or in their roles as institutional actors and managers of civil justice infrastructure. We know little about the factors that shape and influence judicial practices, let alone the consequences of those practices …

Cardozo And The Civil Jury, Michael D. Green, Ashley Dimuzio

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ode To Judge Leon D. Lazer, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cardozo, The Canon And Some Critical Thoughts About Pedagogy, Deborah W. Post

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Studying The "New" Civil Judges, Anna E. Carpenter, Jessica K. Steinberg, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark

Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works

We know very little about the people and institutions that make up the bulk of the United States civil justice system: state judges and state courts.Our understanding of civil justice is based primarily on federal litigationand the decisions of appellate judges. Staggeringly little legalscholarship focuses on state courts and judges. We imply do not know what mostjudges are doing in their day-to-day courtroom roles or in their roles asinstitutional actors and managers of civil justice infrastructure. We know little about the factors that shape and influence judicial practices, let alone the consequences of those practices for courts, litigants, and the …

Arguing With Friends, William Baude, Ryan D. Doerfler

Michigan Law Review

Judges sometimes disagree about the best way to resolve a case. But the conventional wisdom is that they should not be too swayed by such disagreement and should do their best to decide the case by their own lights. An emerging critique questions this view, arguing instead for widespread humility. In the face of disagreement, the argument goes, judges should generally concede ambiguity and uncertainty in almost all contested cases.

Both positions are wrong. Drawing on the philosophical concepts of “peer disagreement” and “epistemic peerhood,” we argue for a different approach: A judge ought to give significant weight to the …

Recovering Wagner V. International Railway Company, Kenneth S. Abraham, G. Edward White

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Palsgraf V. Long Island R.R.: Its Historical Context, William E. Nelson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Analyzing Justice Cardozo’S Opinions On The Constitutionality Of The New Deal, Robert J. Pushaw Jr

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Mediation: From Debates To Renewal, Jean-François Roberge, Dorcas Quek Anderson

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

Judicial mediation involving a judge acting as a mediator in a court dispute has been implemented in many jurisdictions worldwide as a way to overcome access to justice challenges. This innovation has raised many debates on the changing role of the judge built on either its congruence with or divergence from judicial adjudication. Over the years, these debates have become increasingly stagnant. The evolving vision on access to justice brings an opportunity to draw from the earlier debates and forge a different way forward. This paper argues that a coequality approach to understanding judicial mediation is a better way to …

Twitter And The #So-Calledjudge, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

SMU Law Review

Two-hundred-eighty characters may be insufficient to deliver a treatise on the judiciary, but it is more than enough to deliver criticism of the third branch of government. Today, these tweeted critiques sometimes come not from the general public but from the President himself. Attacks such as these come at a challenging time for court systems. We live in a highly politicized, polarized society. This polarization is reflected in attitudes toward the courts, particularly the federal courts. Unfortunately, public doubts about the court system come at a time when public understanding of the structure of government, and especially the court system, …

The “New” District Court Activism In Criminal Justice Reform, Jessica A. Roth

Articles

Historically, the debate over the judicial role has centered on the constitutional and administrative law decisions of the United States Supreme Court, with an occasional glance at the Federal Courts of Appeals. It has, moreover, been concerned solely with the “in-court” behavior of Article III appellate judges as they carry out their power and duty “to say what the law is” in the context of resolving “cases and controversies.” This Article seeks to deepen the discussion of the appropriate role of Article III judges by broadening it to trial, as well as appellate, judges; and by distinguishing between an Article …

Are Advocates General Political? An Empirical Analysis Of The Voting Behavior Of The Advocates General At The European Court Of Justice, Jens Frankenreiter

Scholarship@WashULaw

The question whether political preferences of EU Member States play a role in the decision making of the members of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has so far gone largely unanswered in the literature. This paper formally tests the hypothesis that the political preferences of Member State governments are reflected in the decisions of the Advocates General, who are judge-like members of the ECJ. The empirical analysis is motivated by a novel model of the interaction between the Advocate General and the judicial panel. It uses a newly assembled dataset combining information on agreements and disagreements between the opinions …

Public Confidence In The Courts In The Internet Age: The Ethical Landscape For Judges In The Post-Watergate Age, Carolyn A. Dubay

Campbell Law Review

Promoting and protecting public confidence in government institutions is central to continued faith in the rule of law. As a result, when personal scandals or internal failures threaten public trust in government institutions, policy makers have been quick to respond with new measures to increase accountability for misconduct. In the twentieth century, the Watergate scandal of the early 1970s led to significant changes in accountability for misconduct by high-level public officials and in the legal profession generally. For judges, in the years just prior to Watergate, high-profile scandals involving federal judges also led to significant changes in the regulation of …

Judging Well, Francis J. Mootz Iii

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

Can judges interpret the law in a manner that is objectively verifiable, or do judges necessarily – even if unconsciously – inject their own predispositions and biases into their decisions? It is difficult to decide whether such a question is frivolous in the post-Realist age, or whether it is the is the single most important question that we can ask about our legal system. I endorse both responses. The question, as phrased, is both vitally important and unanswerable on its own terms. Rather than seeking an elusive objective standard by which to measure the correctness of “a judgment,” I argue …

The Imperfect But Necessary Lawsuit: Why Suing State Judges Is Necessary To Ensure That Statutes Creating A Private Cause Of Action Are Constitutional, Stephen N. Scaife

Law Student Publications

"State legislatures can indirectly, but effectively, restrict constitutional rights by enacting statutes that create a private cause of action. This is possible when the cause of action creates potential damages that are so severe as to de facto compel people and entities from engaging in certain conduct. For example, if a statute allows private citizens to sue a person when that person engages in X, then individuals and entities may cease to engage in X if the possible liability arising from engaging in X is too significant. When the United States Constitution protects the conduct that the statute de facto, …