Jurisprudence Commons^™

Emotional Common Sense As Constitutional Law, Terry A. Maroney

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Gonzales v. Carhart the Supreme Court invoked post-abortion regret to justify a ban on a particular abortion procedure. The Court was proudly folk-psychological, representing its observations about women's emotional experiences as "self-evident." That such observations could drive critical legal determinations was, apparently, even more self-evident, as it received no mention at all. Far from being sui generis, Carhart reflects a previously unidentified norm permeating constitutional jurisprudence: reliance on what this Article coins "emotional common sense." Emotional common sense is what one unreflectively thinks she knows about the emotions. A species of common sense, it seems obvious and universal to …

Changing Language, Unchanging Standard: From 'Satisfied Conscience' To 'Moral Certainty' And 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt', Barbara Shapiro

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article explores the historical evolution of the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard in Anglo-American law, tracing its roots to earlier concepts such as "satisfied conscience" and "moral certainty." These ideas, influenced by Christian casuistry and Enlightenment thought, were integral to the development of legal evidence standards. The standard became a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence, reflecting a shift from religious to secular language while maintaining a high threshold for conviction.

Commerce Flaws: "Taking Exception" With Garb V. Poland'S Misinterpretation Of The Commercial Activity And Takings Exceptions Of The Fsia, Joshua A. Kirstein

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The Second Circuit's application of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) in the Garb case was flawed, as it incorrectly used the "core functions" test instead of the "legal characteristics" test. This led to the improper granting of sovereign immunity to Poland, denying justice to the plaintiffs in a Holocaust-era property dispute. The decision undermines the FSIA's intent and sets a concerning precedent.

Aedpa, Saucier, And The Stronger Case For Rights-First Constitutional Adjudication, Stephen I. Vladeck

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

As part of a symposium on new affirmative visions of the judicial role, this essay takes on the Supreme Court's increasing unwillingness to resolve constitutional questions in post-conviction habeas cases under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), as seen in decisions such as Wright v. Van Patten, 128 S. Ct. 743 (2008). In most cases in which AEDPA applies, a petitioner is only eligible for relief if a state court's constitutional error was unreasonable based on prior Supreme Court decisions (and not dicta). As a result, the Court has repeatedly concluded that a state court did …

Will Quants Rule The (Legal) World?, Edward K. Cheng

Michigan Law Review

The quants are coming! And they are here to stay-so argues Professor Ian Ayres' in his new book, Super Crunchers, which details the brave new world of statistical prediction and how it has already begun to affect our lives. For years, academic researchers have known about the considerable and at times surprising advantages of statistical models over the considered judgments of experienced clinicians and experts. Today, these models are emerging all over the landscape. Whether the field is wine, baseball, medicine, or consumer relations, they are vying against traditional experts for control over how we make decisions. To be …

Judicial Adherence To A Minimum Core Approach To Socio-Economic Rights – A Comparative Perspective, Joie Chowdhury

Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers

Today’s world is witness to extraordinary inequality and the most desperate poverty. Millions of people across the world have no access to adequate food or water, basic health care or minimum levels of education. There are many avenues through which to approach the issue of improving socio-economic conditions. Courts, especially recently, have in certain countries, been seeking to ameliorate these conditions, to some extent, through the means of socio-economic rights adjudication.

For courts to effectively empower people to realize their socio-economic rights, attention to implementation of judgments is essential. A strong normative base for such judgments is just as crucial, …

Delivering The Goods: Herein Of Mead, Delegations, And Authority, Patrick Mckinley Brennan

Working Paper Series

This paper argues, first, that the natural law position, according to which it is the function of human law and political authorities to instantiate certain individual goods and the common good of the political community, does not entail judges' having the power or authority to speak the natural law directly. It goes on to argue, second, that lawmaking power/authority must be delegated by the people or their representatives. It then argues, third, that success in making law depends not just on the exercise of delegated power/authority, but also on the exercise of care and deliberation or, in the article's terms, …

Comparative Constitutional Epics, Penelope J. Pether

Working Paper Series

This essay takes up Robert Cover’s account, in “Nomos and Narrative” of Constitutional Epics. Ranging across legal and literary texts including Toni Morrison’s Beloved, David Malouf’s An Imaginary Life, the Canadian Arar Commission Report, and Bringing Them Home, the Report of the Australian Human Rights and Opportunity Commission’s National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, it concludes that what comparative study of Constitutions and their Epics might yield are brutal truths and the judgments of history, but also insights into how we might make of that unpromising material a nomos and a …

Cautionary Tales, Penelope J. Pether

Working Paper Series

“This is a review essay of Nan Seuffert’s Jurisprudence of National Identity: Kaleidoscopes of Imperialism and Globalisation from Aotearoa New Zealand (Ashgate, 2006), a critical, interdisciplinary study of the construction of national identity of Aotearoa New Zealand, which unearths the raced and gendered constitution of this postcolonial nation state.”

The Long War, The Federal Courts, And The Necessity / Legality Paradox, Stephen I. Vladeck

Book Reviews

This paper is a solicited review of Ben Wittes's book "Law and the Long War: The Future of Justice in the Age of Terror," which rightly suggests that there would be far less legal uncertainty today vis-a-vis the conduct of the war on terrorism had the Bush Administration sought - and had Congress provided - framework legislation governing issues ranging from the detention of "enemy combatants" to surveillance and even interrogation. Nevertheless, the review takes issue with Wittes's critique of the role of the courts thus far, especially his contention that the Supreme Court's decisions to date may be seen …

Judicial Independence In Excess: Reviving The Judicial Duty Of The Supreme Court, Paul D. Carrington, Roger C. Cramton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Independence from extrinsic influence is, we know, indispensable to public trust in the integrity of professional judges who share the duty to decide cases according to preexisting law. But such independence is less appropriate for those expected to make new law to govern future events. Indeed, in a democratic government those who make new law are expected to be accountable to their constituents, not independent of their interests and unresponsive to their desires. The Supreme Court of the United States has in the last century largely forsaken responsibility for the homely task of deciding cases in accord with preexisting law …

Daniel Arises: Notes (Such As 30 And 31) From The Schlagaground*, Richard H. Weisberg

Articles

The article critiques the state of legal academia, arguing that it has become mired in mediocrity and disconnected from the pursuit of justice and creative thinking. It contends that legal education and scholarly discourse have been stifled by a focus on narrow, unimaginative logic, leading to a decline in intellectual rigor and a failure to inspire meaningful change.

Extraordinary Rendition: A Wrong Without A Right, Robert Johnson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Controversial Gvrs - And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Michigan Law Review

This Article addresses a relatively neglected portion of the Supreme Court's docket: the "GVR"-that is, the Court's procedure for summarily granting certiorari, vacating the decision below without finding error, and remanding the case for further consideration by the lower court. The purpose of the GVR device is to give the lower court the initial opportunity to consider the possible impact of a new development (such as a recently issued Supreme Court decision) and, if necessary, to revise its ruling in light of the changed circumstances. The Court may issue scores or even hundreds of these orders every year. This Article …

Teaching Legal Ideals Through Jurisprudence, Seow Hon Tan

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

This article examines the value of jurisprudence in legal education. It argues that jurisprudence should be mandated at an early stage of the students' law curriculum as the legal ideals that may be imparted through a jurisprudence course cannot be adequately taught in a professional ethics course or through teaching jurisprudential perspectives in doctrinal subjects. Law schools have a special responsibility to get students thinking about what law is, what makes law legitimate, and how law is related to justice, morality, politics and rationality. A mandatory jurisprudence course should be intentionally structured along these themes.

District Of Columbia V. Heller And Originalism, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

On June 26, 2008, the United States Supreme Court handed down its 5-4 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, striking a District of Columbia statute that prohibits the possession of useable handguns in the home on the ground that it violated the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Justice Scalia's majority opinion drew dissents from Justice Stevens and Justice Breyer. Collectively, the opinions in Heller represent the most important and extensive debate on the role of original meaning in constitutional interpretation among the members of the contemporary Supreme Court.

This Article investigates the relationship between originalist constitutional theory …

The Number Of States And The Economics Of American Federalism, Steven G. Calabresi, Nicholas K. Terrell

Faculty Working Papers

In 1789 it was possible to speak of a federation of distinct States joined together for their mutual advantage, but today it is rather the Nation that is divided into subnational units. What caused this shift in focus from the States to the Federal Government? Surely the transformation from a collection of thirteen historically separate States clustered along the Atlantic seaboard to a group of fifty States largely carved out of Federal territory has played a role. Building on previous analysis of the economics of federalism, this essay considers the dynamic effects of increasing the number of states on the …

Overturning The Last Stone: The Final Step In Returning Precedential Status To All Opinions, David R. Cleveland

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Legal Taxonomy, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This essay examines the ambition to taxonomize law and the different methods a legal taxonomer might employ. Three possibilities emerge. The first is a formal taxonomy that classifies legal materials according to rules of order and clarity. Formal taxonomy is primarily conventional and has no normative implications for judicial decision-making. The second possibility is a function-based taxonomy that classifies laws according to their social functions. Function-based taxonomy can influence legal decision-making indirectly, as a gatekeeping mechanism, but it does not provide decisional standards for courts. Its objective is to assist in analysis and criticism of law by providing an overview …

When The School Bully Attacks In The Living Room: Using Tinker To Regulate Off-Campus Student Cyberbullying, Karly Zande

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Robert George’S The Clash Of Orthodoxies: Law, Religion, And Morality In Crisis, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Goodbye Forfeiture, Hello Waiver: The Effect Of Giles V. California, Monica J. Smith

Barry Law Review

This article begins with a presentation of the Giles case and provides an historical understanding of the confrontation right and forfeiture by wrongdoing under the Constitution, common law, and Federal Rules of Evidence. Through an examination of waiver requirements for other confrontation rights, the article demonstrates that the Court’s addition of an intent element has turned the forfeiture doctrine into a waiver of the confrontation right by misconduct.

The New Poor At Our Gates: Global Justice Implications For International Trade And Tax Law, Ilan Benshalom

Faculty Working Papers

The Article explains why international trade and tax arrangements should advance global wealth redistribution in a world of enhanced economic integration. Despite the indisputable importance of global poverty and inequality, contemporary political philosophy stagnates over the controversy of whether distributive justice obligations should extend beyond the political framework of the nation state. This stagnation results from the difficulty of reconciling liberal impartiality with notions of state sovereignty and accountability. The Article offers an alternative approach that bypasses the controversy of the current debate. It argues that international trade results in relational distributive duties when domestic parties engage in transactions with …

The Death Of The American Trial, Robert P. Burns

Faculty Working Papers

This short essay is a summary of my assessment of the meaning of the "vanishing trial" phenomenon. It addresses the obvious question: "So what?" It first briefly reviews the evidence of the trial's decline. It then sets out the steps necessary to understand the political and social signficance of our vastly reducing the trial's importance among our modes of social ordering. The essay serves as the Introduction to a book, The Death of the American Trial, soon to be published by the University of Chicago Press.

Abortion As Betrayal, Richard Stith

Law Faculty Publications

Abortion is worse than ordinary murder, principally because it involves the betrayal of a dependent by a natural guardian. Furthermore, abortion is emblematic of wider lethal betrayals of radically dependent persons. All these betrayals are rationalized precisely by the victims’ lack of autonomy-based dignity. Christianity counters by affirming the concern and respect due to those who helplessly suffer worldly disdain.

Beyond The Torture Memos: Perceptual Filters, Cultural Commitments, And Partisan Identity, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Faculty Publications

Who should face accountability for the mistreatment of prisoners in the war on terror? Five years ago, the scope of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib was first revealed; this year, the Justice Department admitted that a single suspect was waterboarded 183 times. Some at the bottom of the political hierarchy have already been convicted for their participation in prisoner abuse. Those closer to the top of the political hierarchy also find their actions subject to scrutiny, as the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility is carrying out an investigation into the professional conduct of the lawyers who authored the …

Peering Into The Judicial Magic Eight Ball: Arbitrary Decisions In The Area Of Juror Removal, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 813 (2009), Kimberly Wise

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

When The Music Stops, Why Not Require Certain Title Vii Plaintiffs To Find A Chair On Which To Rest Their Complaint?, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 505 (2009), Catherine R. Caifano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is The Door Open Or Closed? Evaluating The Future Of The Federal Medical Peer-Review Privilege, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 561 (2009), Ghazal Sharifi

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Living Constitution Of Ancient Athens: A Comparative Perspective On The Originalism Debate, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 463 (2009), Mark J. Sundahl

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.