Judges Commons^™

Standing The Test Of Time: The Breadth Of Majority Coalitions And The Fate Of U.S. Supreme Court Precedents, Stuart M. Benjamin, Bruce A. Desmarais

Faculty Scholarship

Should a strategic Justice assemble a broader coalition for the majority opinion than is necessary, even if that means accommodating changes that move the opinion away from the author’s ideal holding? If the author’s objective is to durably move the law to his or her ideal holding, the conventional answer is no, because there is a cost and no corresponding benefit. We consider whether attracting a broad majority coalition can placate future courts. Controlling for the size of the coalition, we find that cases with ideologically narrow coalitions are more likely to be treated negatively by later courts. Specifically, adding …

Introduction, Paul Finkelman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Micro And Macro Causes Of Prison Growth, John F. Pfaff

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Commentary, Considering Lesbian, Gay, Transgender, And Bisexual Nominees For The Federal Courts, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Professor Tobias details the ultimately unsuccessful nomination of Edward DuMont to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2010-11 to illustrate the obstacles encountered by LGBT individuals in the federal judicial selection process.

The Meaning Of Mcintyre, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

When certiorari was granted in J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011), many hoped that the Supreme Court would provide much-needed clarification to the area of personal jurisdiction. It didn’t. The Court failed to generate a majority opinion, splitting into Justice Kennedy’s four-Justice plurality, Justice Breyer’s two-Justice concurrence, and Justice Ginsburg’s three-Justice dissent.

This essay – for the Southwestern Journal of International Law’s 2012 symposium “Our Courts and the World: Transnational Litigation and Procedure” – examines how state and federal courts have been using the McIntyre decision. Some lower court opinions have mistakenly interpreted McIntyre as …

Understanding The United States' Incarceration Rate, William T. Pizzi

Publications

What has caused prison sentences to climb so sharply and consistently in the last four decades?

The Judicial Assault On The Clean Water Act, Mark Squillace

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Flight From Judgment: Reflections On Benjamin Barton’S An Empirical Study Of Supreme Court Justice Pre-Appointment Experience, Jennifer Hendricks

Publications

Discusses J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro as an example of the Supreme Court's failure to rely on practical wisdom, in connection with the historic shift toward increasingly elite credentials for the justices.

The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

The third branch of our federal government has traditionally been viewed as the least of the three in terms of the scope of its power and authority. This view finds validation when one considers the extensive authority that Congress has been permitted to exercise over the Federal Judiciary. From the beginning, Congress has understood itself to possess the authority to limit the jurisdiction of inferior federal courts. The Supreme Court has acquiesced to this understanding of congressional authority without much thought or explanation.

It may be possible, however, to imagine a more robust vision of the Judicial Power through closer …

Politics In The Non-Political Branch, Justin L. Swanson

College of Journalism and Mass Communications: Professional Projects

Across the country there exists a patchwork of legal systems by which judges are appointed retained. In some states, like Illinois, it is a fully political process where judges actively campaign for election to the bench. But a majority of states, including Nebraska, have adopted the Merit Selection System, which attempts to remove politics from these processes. Nevertheless, politics can enter into the retention votes. And when they do, it can be extremely difficult for judges to overcome.

The Judicial Duty To Give Reasons: Thong Ah Fat V Public Prosecutor [2011] Sgca 65, Siyuan Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The accused was charged under the Misuse of Drugs Act after being found with 142.41 grams of diamorphine at the Woodlands Checkpoint. The High Court Judge found the accused guilty and sentenced him to death in a brief judgment of five paragraphs. The Court of Appeal, however, ordered a retrial as it was of the view that the Judge’s reasoning was “unclear” and the “judicial duty to give reasoned decisions” was not discharged

Emotional Regulation And Judicial Behavior, Terry A. Maroney

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Judges are human and experience emotion when hearing cases, though the standard account of judging long has denied that fact. In the post-Realist era it is possible to acknowledge that judges have emotional reactions to their work, yet our legal culture continues to insist that a good judge firmly puts those reactions aside. Thus, we expect judges to regulate their emotions, either by preventing emotion’s emergence or by walling off its influence. But judges are given precisely no direction as to how to engage in emotional regulation.
/="/">
/="/">This Article proposes a model for judicial emotion regulation that goes …

In Memoriam: The Honorable Leroy Rountree Hassell, Sr., Hon. Harry L. Carrico

University of Richmond Law Review

Leroy Rountree Hassell, Sr. passed away on February 9, 2011. News of his death devastated those of us associated with him onthe Supreme Court of Virginia. We had lost a dear friend, one always conscious of the needs of his associates and anxious about making sure they were comfortable. Even more, the court lost its peerless leader, and the people of the Commonwealth of Virginialost a dedicated public servant. He will be sorely missed in allcorners of our great state.

Judge Not - Why Won’T Progressives Fight For Federal Judges?, Sonja R. West

Popular Media

Democrats have taken their eye off the ball on judicial appointments for far too long. It took decades for Republicans to build the court system now in place, and it may take many years to rebalance it. But the time to start is yesterday. Until Democrats start slapping “It’s the courts, stupid!” stickers on their rear bumpers, their elected officials aren’t going to change. Until progressives say, “I’m not going to stop writing my senator until Paul Watford gets a hearing,” Obama judges will be slow-walked through hearings and wait months for a floor vote that might never come. We …

Share Transfer Restrictions In Close Corporations As Mechanisms For Intelligible Corporate Outcomes, Stephen J. Leacock

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Lochner V. New York (1905) And Kennedy V. Louisiana (2008): Judicial Reliance On Adversary Argument, Douglas E. Abrams

Faculty Publications

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist called Lochner v. New York (1905) “one of the most ill-starred decisions that [the Supreme Court ever rendered.” The Justices’ deliberations preceding the 5-4 decision demonstrate the courts’ reliance on advocacy in the adversary system of civil and criminal justice. The stark imbalance between the state’s “incredibly sketchy” brief and Joseph Lochner’s sterling submission may have determined Lochner’s outcome, and thus may have changed the course of constitutional history, by leading two Justices to join the majority on the central question of whether New York’s maximum-hours law for bakery workers was a reasonable public health …

Setting The Record Straight On State V. John Ingram Purtle: Reflections On The Great Dissenter, Samuel A. Perroni

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Religious Liberty Of Judges, Daniel R. Suhr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article begins by reviewing the government employee line of cases, starting with United Public Workers v. Mitchell in 1947.29 The first section concludes that the modified Pickering balancing test set forth in United States v. National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) is the appropriate level of scrutiny for judicial conduct rules. The body of this Article reviews ways in which the four canons of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Ethics and official interpretations of and rulings regarding them limit the religious activities of judges. I conclude that numerous applications of the Model Code are unconstitutional infringements on judges’ First …

Coming Off The Bench: Legal And Policy Implications Of Proposals To Allow Retired Justices To Sit By Designation On The Supreme Court, Lisa T. Mcelroy, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In the fall of 2010, Senator Patrick Leahy introduced a bill that would have overridden a New Deal-era federal statute forbidding retired Justices from serving by designation on the Supreme Court of the United States. The Leahy bill would have authorized the Court to recall willing retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices. This Article uses the Leahy bill as a springboard for considering a number of important constitutional and policy questions, including whether the possibility of 4-4 splits justifies the substitution of a retired Justice for an active one; whether permitting retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices would …

Samantar And Executive Power, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

This essay examines Samantar v. Yousuf in the context of broader debate about the relationship between federal common law and executive power. Samantar represents simply the latest effort by the Executive Branch to literally shape the meaning of law through a process referred to in the literature as “executive lawmaking.” While traditional accounts of executive lawmaking typically have treated the idea as a singular concept, Samantar demonstrates the need to bifurcate the concept into at least two different categories: acts of executive lawmaking decoupled from pending litigation and acts of executive lawmaking taken expressly in response to litigation. As Samantar …

Disrobing Judicial Campaign Contributions: A Case For Using The Buckley Framework To Analyze The Constitutionality Of Judicial Solicitation Bans, Aimee Ghosh

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Revising Canada's Ethical Rules For Judges Returning To Practice, Stephen Ga Pitel, Will Bortolin

Dalhousie Law Journal

It has recently become more common for retired Canadian judges to return to the practice of law This development raises an array of ethical considerations and potential threats to the integrity of the administration of justice. Although most codes of legal ethics contemplate the possibility of former judges returning to practice, the rules on this particular topic are dated, under-analyzed, and generally inadequate. This article reviews the Canadian ethical rules that specifically relate to former judges and identifies their shortcomings. In doing so, the authors consider, for comparative purposes, Canadian ethical rules directed at former public officers who return to …

The Impeachment Of The Judges Of The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, 1787-1793: Colonial Judges, Loyalist Lawyers, And The Colonial Assembly, Jim Phillips

Dalhousie Law Journal

In 1790 the Nova Scotia House of Assembly passed seven "articles of impeachment" against two ofthe colony's Supreme Courtjudges, the firstattempt bya British North American assembly to remove superior courtjudges. Although the impeachment failed when the British government rejected the charges, it is noteworthy nonetheless. The product of a dispute between newly arrived loyalist lawyers and a local elite of "old inhabitants, " it was at one and the same time a political struggle between the Assembly and the executive branch, and one that involved concerns about judicial competence. The impeachment crisis also demonstrates the close links between the judiciary …

Supreme Court Of The United States, October Term 2011 Preview, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

Pliva V. Mensing And Its Implications, Brian Wolfman, Dena Feldman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in PLIVA Inc. v. Mensing will immunize generic drug manufacturers facing failure-to-warn claims from state-law liability, and may also have implications for preemption jurisprudence more generally, says attorney Brian Wolfman and co-author Dena Feldman in this BNA Insight. The authors analyze the ruling, and offer their views on the questions that PLIVA raises about the ongoing vitality of the presumption against preemption, the standard for determining ‘‘impossibility’’ preemption, and the propriety of deference to an agency’s views on preemption.

Beyond Common Sense: A Social Psychological Study Of Iqbal's Effect On Claims Of Race Discrimination, Victor D. Quintanilla

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) once operated as a notice pleading rule, requiring plaintiffs to set forth only a "short and plain" statement of their claim. In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, and then Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the United States Supreme Court recast Rule 8(a) into a plausibility pleading standard. To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter "to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Iqbal requires federal courts, when deciding whether a complaint is plausible, to draw on their "judicial experience and common sense." Courts apply this standard …

The Antislavery Judge Reconsidered, Jeffrey M. Schmitt

School of Law Faculty Publications

It is conventionally believed that neutral legal principles required antislavery judges to uphold proslavery legislation in spite of their moral convictions against slavery. Under this view, an antislavery judge who ruled on proslavery legislation was forced to choose, not between liberty and slavery, but rather between liberty and fidelity to his conception of the judicial role in a system of limited government. Focusing on the proslavery Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, this article challenges the conventional view by arguing that the constitutionality of the fugitive act was ambiguous; meaning that neutral legal principles supported a ruling against the fugitive act …

Judges Henry J. Friendly And Benjamin Cardozo: A Tale Of Two Precedents, David M. Dorsen

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Interference With Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Bennett L. Gershman

Pace Law Review

Probably the most damaging external impediment to a lawyer’s ability to render effective assistance to a client may come from the interference by the trial judge in counsel’s advocacy. A judge supervises the conduct of a trial but he is more than a mere umpire or moderator. A trial judge, by his rulings, questions, and comments, has an enormous capacity to affect the merits of a party’s case and thereby influence the verdict of the jury. To be sure, the basic requirement of a trial judge, both legally and ethically, is to be impartial in demeanor as well as in …

Chinese Judicial Culture: From Tradition To Modernity, Shen Deyong

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

Text of an address by the Hon. Justice Shen Deyong at the Brigham Young University Law School, October 21, 2009.