Judges Commons^™

Who Wins In The Supreme Court? An Examination Of Attorney And Law Firm Influence, Adam Feldman

Marquette Law Review

Who are the most successful attorneys in the Supreme Court? A novel way to answer this question is by looking at attorneys’ relative influence on the course of the law. This article performs macro and micro-level analyses of the most successful Supreme Court litigators by examining the amount of language shared between nearly 9,500 Supreme Court merits briefs and their respective Supreme Court opinions from 1946 through 2013. The article also includes analyses of the most successful law firms according to the same metric.

The Second Amendment On Campus, Allen K. Rostron

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Lights Hidden Under Bushel's Case, Thomas A. Green

Book Chapters

Some forty years ago, Charlie Donahue created a course which he titled "Law, Morals and Society." Designed for undergraduates, and situated among the offerings of the University of Michigan's interdisciplinary Medieval and Renaissance Collegium, the course reflected the approach to doing history that, as this volume recognizes, Charlie has followed throughout his long and enormously influential career as scholar, teacher, lecturer, and inepressible master of well-timed interventions during conference-panel discussion periods. "LMS" was composed of four units. Charlie, who taught two of them, led off with the legal basis for the deposition of Richard II; I followed with the law …

Bargaining In The Shadow Of Children's Voices In Divorce Custody Disputes: Comparative Analysis Of Japan And The U.S., Hiroharu Saito

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This paper discusses the social impact of hearing children's wishes in judicial procedures for divorce custody disputes by comparing the different legal systems in Japan and the U.S. In particular, through a plain law and economics approach with the analytical framework of "Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law" suggested by Mnookin and Kornhauser (1979), this paper discusses the backlash to parents' bargaining outside the court by empowering children to be heard in court.

There has been a child advocacy movement in Japan to empower children's participation right in the judicial procedures in accordance with the UN Convention on the …

Judge Shopping In The Eastern District Of Texas, Jonas Anderson

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Judge Rodney Gilstrap has a lot of patent cases on his docket. In fact, in 2015 there were 1,686 patent cases that were filed and assigned to Judge Gilstrap, an astronomical number for a single judge. Judge Gilstrap — one of eight federal judges who sit on the Eastern District of Texas — is so popular with patent plaintiffs that over one-fourth of all patent cases in the country are heard by him. This Article addresses the problems with allowing this judge shopping to occur. It reviews the scholarship on the topic that is almost universally opposed to judge shopping …

First Principles And Practical Politics: Thoughts On Judge Pryor's Proposal To Revive Presumptive Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

In recent remarks to the American Law Institute, Judge William Pryor recommended abandonment of the post- Booker advisory version of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and adoption of a simplified presumptive federal guidelines system. There was a time when I shared Judge Pryor's optimism that a sensible system of simplified presumptive sentencing guidelines could be enacted and could achieve its beneficent ends for a useful period thereafter. I have not yet surrendered the dream, but I confess to increased skepticism. The remainder of this essay will explain my pessimistic turn.

Law, Politics, And Legacy Building At The Mclachlin Court In 2014, Jamie Cameron

Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper Series

This Article was written for Osgoode Hall Law School’s annual Constitutional Cases conference, and provides the keynote overview of the McLachlin Court’s 2014 constitutional jurisprudence. The Court’s 2014 constitutional decisions (Appointment and Senate References; Tsilqot’in Nation; Trial Lawyers) and restrictions on Mr. Big operations (Hart), in combination with a tsunami of Charter decisions early in 2015 (the 2015 Labour Trilogy; Carter v. Canada; R. v. Nur; and others), made this a legacy-building year. More than an overview, this Article probes the nature of the McLachlin Court’s legacy this year and the relationship between legal and political dynamics, to ask: in …

The Ideal Judge: How Implicit Bias Shapes Assessment Of State Judges, Rebecca D. Gill, Rafael Oganesyan

Political Science Faculty Research

Judicial Performance Evaluation (JPE) is generally seen as an important part of the merit system, which often suffers from a lack of relevant voter information. Utah’s JPE system has undergone significant change in recent years. Using data from the two most recent JPE surveys, we provide a preliminary look at the operation of this new system. Our results suggest that the survey component has difficulty distinguishing among the judges on the basis of relevant criteria. The question prompts intended to measure performance on different ABA categories are also indistinguishable. We find evidence that, on some measures, female judges do disproportionately …

Restoring The Civil Jury In A World Without Trials, Dmitry Bam

Faculty Publications

Early in this nation’s history, the civil jury was the most important institutional check on biased and corrupt judges. Recently, concerns about judicial bias, especially in elected state judiciaries, have intensified as new studies demonstrate the extent of that bias. But the jury of Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson is nowhere to be found. In fact, the civil jury is virtually dead. It is used in less than 1% of all civil cases, and even when it makes a rare appearance, the jury’s powers have been significantly curtailed.

This article argues that we must reimagine the civil jury to match the …

Whole Other Story: Applying Narrative Mediation To The Immigration Beat, Carol Pauli

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

If Donald Trump, in kicking off his campaign for the White House, was saying "what everyone is thinking" about illegal immigration, it must be that his message mirrored a narrative that already existed in the minds of his audience. That fearful story of criminals invading the U.S. borders has long been a dominant theme in the mainstream news immigration story. Like all news stories, this one focuses attention on some facts at the expense of others. Like many news stories, it draws its power from earlier, well-known tales-some as old as The Flood. This article reconsiders news stories-and the storytelling …

The Call And The Response: The Call, The 1991 Open Letter From Federal Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr., And The 25 Years Of Response From Justice Clarence Thomas, Angela Mae Kupenda

Journal Articles

In 1991, Clarence Thomas was confirmed as the first Black radical conservative Justice, in spite of opposition including credible allegations of sexual harassment lodged against him. His unprecedented confirmation evoked unprecedented reactions, including written ones. One such written action is the basis for this article. Our nation is now fast approaching the anniversary, not only of Thomas’ 25 ceremonial years on the Court, but also of almost 25 years since an unprecedented, published, pointed, open, publicly and widely circulated correspondence was sent to the newly confirmed Justice Thomas by another Black judge. Esteemed Federal Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr., penned …

Underinclusivity And The First Amendment: The Legislative Right To Nibble At Problems After Williams-Yulee, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

Using the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 opinion in Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar as an analytical springboard, this Article examines the slipperiness — and sometimes fatalness — of the underinclusiveness doctrine in First Amendment free-speech jurisprudence. The doctrine allows lawmakers, at least in some instances, to take incremental, step-by-step measures to address harms caused by speech, rather than requiring an all-out, blanket-coverage approach. Yet, if the legislative tack taken is too small to ameliorate the harm that animates a state’s alleged regulatory interest, it could doom the statute for failing to directly advance it. In brief, the doctrine of underinclusivity requires …

The Fourth Chief Justice Of The United States, John Marshall, Meagan Schantz

Writing Across the Curriculum

The fourth Chief Justice of the United States, John Marshall (1755-1835), served thirty-four years (1801-1835) in the United States Supreme Court. During his term, Marshall established a stable foundation for the United States Judiciary, which in turn increased the role and scope of the federal government. Marshall’s life and achievements are documented in the biography, The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law by Charles F. Hobson, the editor of The Papers of John Marshall.

Judging Identity, Carla Pratt

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

A Referee Without A Whistle: Magistrate Judges And Discovery Sanctions In The Seventh Circuit, Landyn Wm. Rookard

Indiana Law Journal

This Note ultimately argues that, if the Seventh Circuit is not willing to reverse its holdings in Alpern v. Lieb and Retired Chicago Police Ass'n v. City of Chicago in light of recent developments, Congress should again clarify its intent. In the face of the crushing "costs of discovery [that] threaten to exceed the amount at issue in all but the largest cases," it is the Seventh Circuit's responsibility to employ all just and legal devices to comply with Congress's mandate "to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding."

Permitting Voluntary Euthanasia And Assisted Suicide: Law Reform Pathways For Common Law Jurisdictions, Jocelyn Downie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

End of life law and policy reform is the subject of much discussion around the world. This paper explores the pathways to permissive legal regimes that have been tried in various common law jurisdictions. These include legislation, prosecutorial charging guidelines, court challenges, jury nullification, the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in the absence of offence-specific charging guidelines, and the exercise of judicial discretion in sentencing. In this paper, I describe these pathways as taken (or attempted) in five common law jurisdictions (USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada) and reflect briefly on lessons that can be drawn from the recent experiences …

Judging The Social Sciences In Carter V Canada (Ag), Jodi Lazare

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This paper examines a recent example of evidence-based decision making affecting social policy at the trial court level. It offers a close reading of Carter v Canada (AG), decided by the British Columbia Supreme Court, and of Justice Lynn Smith's careful scrutiny of the social science evidence when invalidating the Criminal Code prohibition on assistance in dying. Drawing on literature which examines the legal system's use of social science evidence and expert witnesses, this paper suggests that Justice Smith's treatment of the evidence in Carter provides an example of skilled judicial treatment of the extensive amounts of social science evidence …

Is Theocracy Our Politics? Thoughts On William Baude's 'Is Originalism Our Law?', Richard A. Primus

Articles

In Is Originalism Our Law?, William Baude has made a good kind of argument in favor of originalism. Rather than contending that originalism is the only coherent theory for interpreting a constitution, he makes the more modest claim that it happens to be the way that American judges interpret our Constitution. If he is right—if originalism is our law—then judges deciding constitutional cases ought to be originalists. But what exactly would the content of that obligation be? Calling some interpretive method “our law” might suggest that judges have an obligation to decide cases by reference to that method. But the …

The Long Shadow Of Bush V. Gore: Judicial Partisanship In Election Cases, Michael S. Kang, Joanna M. Shepherd

Faculty Articles

Bush v. Gore decided a presidential election and is the most dramatic election case in our lifetime, but cases like it are decided every year at the state level. Ordinary state courts regularly decide questions of election rules and administration that effectively determine electoral outcomes hanging immediately in the balance. Election cases like Bush v. Gore embody a fundamental worry with judicial intervention into the political process: outcome-driven, partisan judicial decisionmaking. The Article investigates whether judges decide cases, particularly politically sensitive ones, based on their partisan loyalties more than the legal merits of the cases. It presents a novel method …

Confirm Judge Koh For The Ninth Circuit, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

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 …

Electing Justice Roush To The Supreme Court Of Virginia, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

In late April 2015, the Supreme Court of Virginia announced that Justice LeRoy F. Millette, Jr. would retire on July 31, 2015. Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe expeditiously created an open process for tapping a worthy successor. At July’s conclusion, the Governor appointed Fairfax County Circuit Judge Jane Marum Roush, an experienced, consensus jurist. On a Sunday night, merely two days after Roush swore her oath of office, Republican General Assembly leaders proclaimed their caucuses’ intention to elect another individual, despite conceding that Roush was very qualified. During the August special session, this concerted GOP endeavor prompted a Republican senator to …

The Management Of Staff By Federal Court Of Appeals Judges, Mitu Gulati, Richard A. Posner

Faculty Scholarship

Federal court of appeals judges have staffs consisting usually of a secretary and four law clerks; some judges have externs as well (law students working part time without pay). These staffs are essential, given judicial workloads and judges’ limitations. Yet not much is known about how the judges manage their staffs. Each judge knows, of course, but judges rarely exchange information about staff management. Nor is there, to our knowledge, a literature that attempts to compare and evaluate the varieties of staff management techniques employed by federal court of appeals judges. This Essay aims to fill that gap. It is …

Backlash Against International Courts In West, East And Southern Africa: Causes And Consequences, Karen J. Alter, James T. Gathii, Laurence R. Helfer

Faculty Scholarship

This paper discusses three credible attempts by African governments to restrict the jurisdiction of three similarly-situated sub-regional courts in response to politically controversial rulings. In West Africa, when the ECOWAS Court upheld allegations of torture by opposition journalists in the Gambia, that country’s political leaders sought to restrict the Court’s power to review human rights complaints. The other member states ultimately defeated the Gambia’s proposal. In East Africa, Kenya failed in its efforts to eliminate the EACJ and to remove some of its judges after a decision challenging an election to a sub-regional legislature. However, the member states agreed to …

Courts Of Good And Ill Repute: Garoupa And Ginsburg’S Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory, Tracey E. George, G. Mitu Gulati

Faculty Scholarship

Nuno Garoupa and Tom Ginsburg have published an ambitious book that seeks to account for the great diversity of judicial systems based, in part, on how courts are designed to marshal the power of a high public opinion of the judiciary. Judges, the book posits, care deeply about their reputations both inside and outside the courts. Courts are designed to capitalize on judges’ desire to maximize their reputation, and judges’ existing stock of reputation can affect the design of the courts which they serve. We find much to like in this book, ranging from its intriguing and ambitious positive claims …

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, …

Introduction To Juries And Mixed Tribunals Across The Globe: New Developments, Common Challenges And Future Directions, Nancy S. Marder, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This introduction to the special issue of Oñati Socio-legal Series describes the goals of the conference on Juries and Mixed Tribunals across the Globe, and identifies themes that emerged as jury scholars from all over the world examined different forms of lay participation in legal decision-making. The introduction focuses on common challenges that different systems of lay participation face, including the selection of impartial fact finders and the presentation of complex cases to lay citizens. The introduction and special issue articles also highlight new developments and innovative practices to address these challenges, including some tools, like decision trees, that remain …

Just Listening: The Equal Hearing Principle And The Moral Life Of Judges, Barry Sullivan

Faculty Publications & Other Works

No abstract provided.

Differentiating Deference, Anya Bernstein

Journal Articles

When an administrative agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statutory term is challenged in court, the Chevron doctrine instructs judges to evaluate whether it is reasonable. But how does a court know reasonableness when it sees it? Here, I first show that reasonableness review is more complex than it might seem. Contrary to common images, for instance, courts do not determine a range of reasonable interpretations; and that is a good thing, because they are not competent to do so. Moreover, because traditional statutory interpretation approaches presume the existence of one correct meaning for a given word, they are not well …

A Demographic History Of Federal Judicial Appointments By Gender And Race: 1789-2016, Jonathan K. Stubbs

Law Faculty Publications

This article briefly surveys the constitutional and statutory foundation for the creation of the federal judiciary. It also furnishes data, by sex and race, of the appointment of federal judges to courts of general jurisdiction during each presidential administration from September 24, 1789, through April 11, 2016. Thus, Part I describes the pace of diversification of the federal judiciary. While data regarding other attributes of judges (such as their socioeconomic status) exist, extensive analysis of such characteristics falls outside the parameters of this preliminary analysis. Nonetheless, the Article notes in passing that, since 1989, during each presidential administration, the majority …

The Republican Senate And Regular Order, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Now that the 114th Congress has reached the first session’s conclusion, the purported application of regular order to a major Senate constitutional duty—rendering advice and consent on presidential nominees—merits analysis. This evaluation illuminates serious deficiencies, which plagued 2015 confirmations. Especially important was the GOP’s failure to expeditiously suggest aspirants for White House consideration, and specifically failing to fill “judicial emergencies,” provide hearings and ballots swiftly, conduct floor debates when required rapidly, and confirm more than 11 judges all year. This obstruction has numerous deleterious consequences; the most significant, however, is not fulfilling the constitutional responsibility to proffer advice and consent …