Jurisprudence Commons^™

Understanding The Big Three’S Wavering Support Of Environmental And Social Shareholder Proposals, Jeff Schwartz, Jefferson Jensen

Seattle University Law Review

Because of their substantial equity portfolios, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street (the Big 3) are central players in corporate governance. It is, therefore, critical to understand how they vote. One puzzle is that their support for shareholder proposals on environmental and social matters appears to waiver. In 2020, for instance, BlackRock supported 11.1% of environmental proposals at S&P 500 firms. In 2021, it seemingly reversed course, supporting 55.2%. It then flipped again, supporting 32.1% in 2022. Such statistics suggest that the Big 3 are constantly changing their views on these topics. This Article seeks to better understand whether this is …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Green Dividends: A Case Study In Green Dividends And The Conditions For Private Ordering Solutions, Anne M. Tucker

Seattle University Law Review

This Essay introduces a novel private ordering solution to facilitate corporate investments in pro-social and environmental initiatives: Green dividends. Green dividends are an optional increase in shareholder dividends that are returned to the company to be reinvested in environmental initiatives or kept by a shareholder.

Green dividends pose an alternative to the current gridlocked debate that corporations can’t, won’t, shouldn’t, and shouldn’t even try to act in pro-social or environmental ways. Turning the common refrains on their head converts each narrative into an element for a successful private ordering solution: authority, accountability, shareholder buy-in, and government- backed enforcement. With Green …

Does Climate Disclosure Work To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions? Emerging Evidence Suggests Cautious Optimism, Cynthia A. Williams

Seattle University Law Review

Significant regulatory resources have been spent developing global, voluntary climate and sustainability disclosure standards, such as the TCFD, TNRD, and ISSB’s Sustainability and Climate Disclosure standards, or domestically required disclosures, such as in the EU and in the U.S. Thus, it is important to evaluate whether this disclosure, particularly voluntary, qualitative disclosure, will have the power to shift the allocation of capital, will have a significant effect on the management of climate risk within firms, and ultimately will reduce climate change risk and biodiversity loss.

In this Article, several interrelated questions will be discussed. First, what does the empirical evidence …

War Courts: Fdr, National Security, And The War On Terrorism, Harvey Gee

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Dobbs V. Brown, Benjamin H. Barton

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization1is the most important and impactful Supreme Court decision since at least Roe v. Wade, and potentially since Brown v. Board of Education. Past survey data show that most Americans can only name two Supreme Court opinions: Roe and Brown. Dobbs will surely join that list. This Article compares the history, drafting, and opinions of Dobbs and Brown to show what a missed opportunity Dobbs represents. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the opinion, it should be clear that Dobbs was one of those unique times (like that of Brown) where the Court …

Structuring The President’S Removal Power: An Agency-Specific Approach, Peter Margulies

American University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions have taken a broad view of the President’s power to remove executive branch officials. According to the Court, the President’s Article II obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” generally requires that the President have authority to remove officials at will. The Court has thus far declined to overrule Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision upholding “forcause” restrictions on removal for multi-member “quasi-judicial” bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Nonetheless, recent Court decisions have eroded the rationale in the earlier case, which has received additional attention because of efforts …

Art. Iii-Gpt, Nick Mckinley

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

This article recommends the development and deployment of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) large language model (LLM) tool by and for the federal judiciary. LLMs are revolutionizing legal practice, and judges should accordingly be familiar and in regular practice with LLM technology. LLMs can greatly assist the courts by increasing operational efficiency and public access to justice. Particularly, LLMs can improve efficiency in legal research, legal writing, and administration. LLMs present limitations or potential problems in the form of prompt dependency and harmful bias, limitations of data in their training sets, privacy and confidentiality, and the production of false or fabricated …

Court Review: Journal Of The American Judges Association, Vol. 61, No. 2, Eve M. Brank, David J. Dreyer, Reba Ann Page, Jane Manning

Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association

Contents

Understanding GenAI What Courts Should Know, AI Rapid Response Team of the National Center for State Courts

Large Language Models, Newer, More Powerful Large Reasoning Models, and the Courts, Pablo Arredondo and Javed Qadrud-Din

Any Sufficiently Transparent Magic... Damien Patrick Williams

Principles and Practices for Using AI, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Evidentiary Issues Raised by Artificial Intelligence, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Bench Card: Acknowledged AI-Generated Evidence, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Bench Card: Evaluating Unacknowledged AI-Generated Evidence, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Want to Know More About AI? ABA …

Court Review: Journal Of The American Judges Association, Vol. 61, No. 3 & 4, Eve M. Brank, David J. Dreyer, Reba Ann Page

Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association

Contents

Civil Cases in the Supreme Court’s October Term 2024, Thomas M. Fisher

Consensus and Conflict Over Context: Select Criminal Law and Procedure Cases from the Supreme Court’s 2024-25 Term, Eve Brensike Primus and Elena Schultz

Yes, There’s a Public Trust Crisis but Your Daily Efforts Can Reverse It, Emily LaGratta and Tom R. Tyler

Was That Wrong? Spontaneity’s Role in Judicial Discipline Allegations, John W. Valente, Shawn C. Marsh, and Tahliah Ling

Correction: Large Language Models, Newer, More Powerful Large Reasoning Models, and the Courts

Editors' Note, Reba Ann Page and David J. Dreyer

Thoughts from Canada: The Supreme …

Doubting Thomas And Questioning Stare Decisis Under The Roberts Court, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

Articles

The article critically examines the erosion of stare decisis under the Roberts Court, highlighting concerns about the Supreme Court's increasing willingness to overturn established precedents. While acknowledging the importance of stare decisis in maintaining stability and equality, the author argues that its practical value is being undermined by ideological polarization and a departure from traditional legal reasoning. The article questions the Court's recent approach to precedent, particularly in cases like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and critiques the conservative majority's aggressive use of judicial power.

Precedential Trauma: Integrating Trauma-Informed Judging In Federal Courts Of Appeals Through Opinion Writing, Alison Brochu

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Inadequacy Of Perpetuating Vestiges Of Segregation In K-12 Curriculum: The Justiciability Of Reviewing Duties To Adequacy In Florida's Education Clause, Soumya Sreerama

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Although the Supreme Court declared segregation the most abusive affront to education and ruled to eliminate vestiges of segregation “root and branch,” those same roots have grown unchecked to remain prominent today. One of the undercurrents of state-sponsored discrimination that has escaped desegregation remedies is the skewed, whitewashed curriculum that permeated K-12 classrooms in Jim Crow America. More troubling, is that those vestiges of an inadequately biased curriculum are still slithering in students’ courses today. Although student movements and education reformists have attempted to counter skewed curricula by supplementing them with separate ethnic studies courses, states like Florida recently passed …

Scientific Educations Among U.S. Judges, Christa J. Laser

American University Law Review

Should more judges have technical and scientific educations than are currently prevalent in the federal judiciary? This empirical study of the educational background of federal judges reports the undergraduate and graduate majors of active U.S. federal Article III judges. Information on the subject area of study is largely not publicly available, especially for judges appointed decades ago. This is the first and only publicly available research study of the subject areas of study of U.S. judges, collected via phone and email surveys to U.S. judges. The results of this study show that only 7.35% of federal judges have majors in …

The Paradox Of Continuing Risk, W. Jonathan Cardi, Ashton Jenne, Chance Villarreal

American University Law Review

The continuing-risk rule is ubiquitously cited by Restatements, casebooks, and treatises as a core duty rule in negligence cases. Indeed, as this Article reveals, the rule has been “adopted”—in the sense that at least one court in a jurisdiction has applied the rule, and no court has rejected it—in thirty-one jurisdictions. In addition to the breadth of its adoption, the continuing-risk rule is also far-reaching: it imposes an affirmative duty to warn, protect, or rescue another from a risk if the defendant’s conduct contributed to the initial creation of that risk. Because most negligence cases involve risk-creating conduct by the …

Electing The Supreme Court, Dmitry Bam

FIU Law Review

There is a curious irony in how we select United States Supreme Court justices. According to basic constitutional theory, as well as the arguments made by many leading Framers at the time of the Founding, one of the Court’s primary roles is to serve as a check on the executive and legislative branches when they exceed the constitutional limits imposed by the American people. Yet, we ask those very branches to jointly select the justices responsible for enforcing these limits, leaving the American people with only an indirect (if any) role in the process. Not surprisingly, the justices nominated by …

Intuitions In Tort Law And Theory, James A. Macleod

Articles

This Essay highlights the many ways that ordinary conceptual and moral intuitions shape the development of tort law. It further argues that, for a range of doctrinal and institutional reasons, such intuitions deserve a central place in tort theorists’ efforts to explain, predict, justify, and reform the law of torts. Finally, given the stakes for both positive and normative tort theory, the Essay emphasizes the need for more systematic empirical research into the content and operation of people’s tort-relevant intuitions.

Defining The Field Of Judicial Administration, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

This Keynote address, as part of a symposium on "Theorizing the Judicial Process," aims to make a case for the field of judicial administration and to define the field more generally. Specifically, it seeks to raise the organizing questions of the field and to note the kind of work--descriptive, empirical, and theoretical--that is needed to answer them. The hope is to map out a collective research agenda for courts scholars to pursue into the future for the benefit of the academy and judiciary, both.

Legal Summaries Of Administrative Law Cases, Kimberly M. Papadantonakis

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Ghost Guns: A Case Study On The Tension Between Public Exigencies And Statutory Construction, Bradley Krause

Catholic University Law Review

Administrative agencies often navigate public policy issues while simultaneously handling complex and highly technical matters. When facing a public emergency, how should courts interpret these agencies’ authorizing statutes? What rules of thumb exist to guide the courts? This Comment answers these questions through a case study on ongoing litigation pertaining to a recent ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) regulation. The regulation, targeted towards ghost guns (also known as “privately manufactured firearms”), seeks to incorporate these weapons within pre-existing definitions in the ATF’s authorizing statute, the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). In spite of challenges to the regulation, …

A Fundamental Failing: The Mississippi Judiciary's Abrogation Of Its Constitutional Duty, Brad Robertson

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law, Fact, And Appellate Review, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

For centuries, courts have been called upon to distinguish between law and fact. That distinction played a key role in recent Supreme Court decisions on two critical components of appellate review. Dupree v. Younger considered an important question regarding what a party must do at trial to preserve an issue for appellate review. And Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. addressed how to select and apply the standard of appellate review--specifically, whether and how the appellate court must show deference to particular decisions made at the trial level.
Both decisions were partially right. Dupree correctly focused on whether certain early …

U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Seventh Circuit To Hold Oral Argument At The Maurer School Of Law, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit—one of 13 appellate courts of the United States federal judiciary—will hear oral argument at the Indiana University Maurer School of Law on Thursday, October 24.

The arguments are scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. in the Law School’s DeLaney Moot Court Room. The proceedings are open to the public, with seating available on a first-come, first-served basis starting at 9 a.m. An overflow room will be available if needed. The arguments are expected to conclude by 12:30 p.m.

“The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has a …

Prudence, Role Morality, And Restraint: Judge Wilkinson On The Separation Of Powers, Katherine Mims Crocker, Jack Goldsmith

Faculty Scholarship

Caution in reviewing the actions of the legislative and executive branches has been a hallmark of the jurisprudence of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III. The Constitution “at most gives judges specific authority to redress violations of specific provisions,” Judge Wilkinson writes in his book Cosmic Constitutional Theory. But even when doing so, “courts must exercise great caution before injecting themselves into the vortex of varied political questions,” for “[i]t is often far preferable to allow the political institutions under our Constitution to struggle among themselves, with each bringing to bear the respective arsenal of powers the Framers accorded them.” …

University Of The District Of Columbia Law Review, University Of The District Of Columbia Law Review

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Problems With Authority, Amy J. Griffin

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Judicial decision-making rests on a foundation of unwritten rules—those that govern the weight of authority. Such rules, including the cornerstone principle of stare decisis, are created informally through the internal social practices of the judiciary. Because weight-of-authority rules are largely informal and almost entirely unwritten, we lack a comprehensive account of their content. This raises serious questions—sounding in due process and access to justice—about whether judicial decision-making rests ultimately on judges’ arbitrary and unexamined preferences rather than transparent and deliberative processes. These norms of authority are largely invisible to many, including parties appearing before the courts. They govern the …

Egypt’S Legal Modernism: Challenging The National Discourse, Mohamed A. El-Deeb

Theses and Dissertations

Egypt’s legal modernity is the story of the modern Egyptian state itself. Reforming the country’s judiciary in the late nineteenth century was meant to achieve ambitious aims beyond the functionality of a justice system. The utmost goal was the country’s independence from the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire. The judicial reforms modernized the Egyptian state and built a judiciary and legal community like no other place. Egypt achieved its independent judiciary before gaining its political independence. That was a remarkable achievement of the judicial reform. That rich part of Egypt’s modern history is negated and disregarded from public awareness. Not …

In Conversation About The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum’S New Mass Atrocity Prevention Training, Tatiana Varanko, Ann O’Rourke

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Governance And Islam In East Africa: Muslims And The State In Kenya And Tanzania, Farouk Topan, Kai Kresse, Erin E. Stiles, Hassan Mwakimako

Exploring Muslim Contexts

Explores the relationship between Muslim communities and the State in East Africa in political, institutional and legal contexts

• Focuses on the relationship between Muslims and the State in Kenya and Tanzania
• Asks which factors, both within and outside the Muslim community, shape and affect this relationship in contemporary times
• Presents 13 case studies exploring governance issues within and across the categories of politics, institutions and law in Kenya and Tanzania
• Identifies cross-cutting issues of governance and Muslim communities which are relevant beyond East Africa

Recent studies of Muslims in Kenya and Tanzania have tended either to examine governance of Muslims …

Immoderate Moderation: Chief Justice Roberts's Concurrence In Dobbs, Thomas J. Molony

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Chief Justice John Roberts attempted to chart a middle way in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. But there are times when you must choose a side. This was one of them.

The Chief Justice has been a consistent proponent of judicial restraint since he joined the United States Supreme Court in 2005. For him, one of the key characteristics of restraint is deciding no more than necessary to resolve a case. In Dobbs, he insisted that the Court did not need to overrule Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in full to uphold Mississippi’s fifteen-week …