Jurisprudence Commons^™

Empirical Desert And The Moral Economy Of Punishment, Zachary R. Calo

Scholarly Works

This paper considers Paul Robinson's theory of empirical desert as an argument for moving beyond the debate between utilitarian and retributivist accounts of punishment. It is argued that empirical desert, in its attempt to replace philosophy with the insights of the social and biological sciences, fails to ground the foundational act of punishment in an adequate theoretical warrant. A particular problem confronting empirical desert is that while Robinson shifts the locus of punishment from theory to the intuitions of the relevant community, he does not adequately account for the dynamic process by which communities shape and structure their internal moral …

The Geography Of Criminal Law, Adam Benforado

Cardozo Law Review

When Westerners explain the causes of actions or outcomes in the criminal law context, they demonstrate a strong tendency to overestimate the importance of dispositional factors, like thinking, preferring, and willing, and underestimate the impact of interior and exterior situational factors, including environmental, historical, and social forces, as well as affective states, knowledge structures, motives, and other unseen aspects of our cognitive frameworks and processes. One of the situational factors that we are particularly likely to overlook is physical space - that is, landscapes, places, natures, boundaries, and spatialities. Our shortsightedness comes at a great cost. Spatial concerns shape legal …

Prevention And Complementarity In The International Criminal Court: A Positive Approach, Katharine A. Marshall

Human Rights Brief

No abstract provided.

Rights, Harms, And Duties: A Response To Justice For Hedgehogs, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author responds to the three jurisprudential positions that Ronald Dworkin discusses in his book--albeit briefly--so as to integrate them into his hedgehoggian program. The first is that we should think of rights as political trumps, such that the individual liberty protected by the right, and hence the behavior protected by the right, trumps in importance and in effect, both in law and in popular imaginings, the various collective goals with which the right might be in conflict. Second, we should think about our collective life, and the principles that should guide it, through the lens of the rights of …

The Unity Of Interpretation, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

What is interpretation? One can imagine a range of answers to this question. One answer might begin with the observation that the English word “interpretation” is used to refer to a variety of human activities. Translators at the United Nations interpret remarks made in French when they offer an English translation. Literary critics interpret novels when they investigate the deep and sometimes unconscious motivations of the author. Conductors interpret a score when they make decisions about meter, tempo, and dynamic range. Actors interpret a screenplay when they improvise new lines based on their understanding of the characters. Judges interpret statutes …

The Stories We Tell, And Have Told, About Tribal Sovereignty: Legal Fictions At Their Most Pernicious, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Starting with Chief Justice John Marshall and continuing through to the present Supreme Court, the story of Indian sovereignty has been consistent—it exists only in the most diminished form. Some reasons for this have been premised on the incapacity of Indians to self-govern; others on theories of federalism; while still others on the ambitions of non-Indians. However, the factual premises behind the concept of diminished sovereignty are baseless—legal fictions about the conquest of Indians and their nature. These fictions originated in Chief Justice Marshall’s Indian Law Trilogy and should have vanished long ago when their original purposes were fulfilled, like …

The Roberts Court Vs. Free Speech, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

No abstract provided.

Ronald Dworkin’S Justice For Hedgehogs And Partnership Conception Of Democracy (With A Comment To Jeremy Waldron’S 'A Majority In The Lifeboat'), Imer Flores

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this article the author focuses mainly in the last part of Ronald Dworkin´s Justice for Hedgehogs and in his argument for a partnership conception of democracy. For that purpose, first, he recalls some of the main features that Dworkin had advanced in previous but intrinsically related works, about political morality, equality and democracy; second, he reassess the arguments for a partnership conception of democracy; third, he reconsiders the resistance produced by Jeremy Waldron in his “A Majority in the Lifeboat” and the response provided by Dworkin, but since it may appear insufficient, he intends to present an alternative—or complementary—riposte …

“To Remand, Or Not To Remand”: Ventura’S Ordinary Remand Rule And The Evolving Jurisprudence Of Futility, Patrick J. Glen

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

It is a foundational principle of administrative law that a reviewing court should not dispose of a petition for review or appeal on grounds not relied upon by the agency, and should not reach issues in the first instance not addressed administratively. In such circumstances, there is a strong presumption that the reviewing court should remand the case to the agency for further proceedings rather than reach out to decide the disputed issues. The United States Supreme Court explicitly extended operation of the “ordinary remand rule” to the immigration context in its 2002 decision in INS v. Ventura. Notwithstanding subsequent …

Margae, Inc. V. Clear Link Technologies, Jonathan Goodman

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Penggunaan Al-Qiyas Dalam Kitab Umm Al-Barahin., Engku Hassan Engku Wok Zin

Student Works (2010-2019)

This research  attempts to study the use of al-qiyas in  Umm al-Barahin, the writings of Muhammad bin Yusuf al-Sanusi. Expounded in this dissertation  is the prominent  literary figure  who successfully explained the theology doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah based on the use of al-qiyas method. al-Sanusi  was an eminent scholar in the ninth century Hijrah. Kitab  Umm al-Barahin  is an expression  of his theology which applies al-qiyas to explain issues of theology according to the thoughts of al-Asya`irah. The  use of al-qiyas is a method ti create al-tasdiq  indirectly. al-Qiyas  has many forms, such as al-qiyas from al-burhan can …

Constitutional Litigation Under Section 1983 And The Bivens Doctrine In The October 2008 Term, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

Section 1983 is the major enforcer of individual federal constitutional rights. It authorizes individuals to enforce their constitutional rights against state and local officials; for example,prison officers and police officers, and against municipalities. It is the most important civil statute in American law. To its credit, the United States Supreme Court understands the significance of § 1983.

For the past three decades, in virtually every single Term of theCourt, it has decided a substantial number of cases dealing with different facets of § 1983 litigation. Last Term, there was anunusual number of § 1983 decisions rendered by the United States …

Proportionality, Rationality And Review, Paul Craig

Articles by Maurer Faculty

There is a debate in certain common law jurisdictions as to whether proportionality should be accepted as a general criterion for judicial review in administrative law. This article responds to Mike Taggart’s bifurcation thesis and his argument that proportionality should be reserved for rights-based cases, with low intensity rationality review being used for other types of case. I argue to the contrary that proportionality should be a general principle of judicial review that can be used both in cases concerned with rights and in non-rights based cases, albeit with varying intensity of review. The article begins by addressing the advantages …

Review Of Law At The Vanishing Point By Aaron Fichtelberg, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

This is a largely critical review of Professor Aaron Fichtelberg’s philosophical analysis of international law. The centerpiece of the book’s affirmative agenda, a “non-reductionist” definition of international law that purports to elide various forms of international law skepticism, strikes the reviewer as circular, misguided in general, and, in its application to substantive international legal issues, difficult to distinguish from a rote form of legal positivism. Law at the Vanishing Point’s avowed empirical methodology and critical agenda, while largely unobjectionable, offer little that has not been said before, often with equal if not greater force. I commend the author’s effort to …

Conspicuous Logic: Using The Logical Fallacy Of Affirming The Consequent As A Litigation Tool, Stephen M. Rice

Barry Law Review

This article will address one of the specific logical fallacies known as the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent, discuss the place of formal logic in legal reasoning, describe the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent, demonstrate how courts have explicitly used the fallacy in deciding cases, and detail how litigators can use the Fallacy to win cases.

“Runaway Train”: Controlling Crimes Committed By Private Contractors Through Application Of The Uniform Code Of Military Justice, Matthew Dahl

Barry Law Review

This paper will argue that, in the absence of effective alternatives, the new law granting court-martial jurisdiction over civilians is a necessary step in effectively controlling crimes by private contractors and other civilians accompanying U.S. armed forces overseas if other measures are not effectuated. Part II will look at two important Supreme Court decisions that currently restrict the military’s ability to court-martial civilians, and it will also highlight the government’s attempts over the past 50 years to come up with a solution to the problem. Part III will examine three alternatives to the amendment to Article 2(a)(10) that could make …

Triple-A Ratings Stench: May The Credit Rating Agencies Be Held Accountable?, Thomas J. Pate

Barry Law Review

This article analyzes the role the Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) played in developing markets for certain types of asset-backed securities in order to identify how the CRAs promoted the leverage build up that occurred over the past 15 years. This analysis will highlight the fundamental flaws in the ratings process, with a view toward being able to assign responsibility accordingly. Further, the motivations of banks, financial institutions, and corporate issuers in relying on the CRAs will be critiqued. Additionally, the principal past and current in-court claims against the CRAs will be analyzed and hypotheses will be drawn on the liability …

In The Trenches Of Florida’S War On Gangs: A Framework For Prosecuting Florida’S Anti-Gang Sentence Enhancement Provision, Rodrigo M. Caruço

Barry Law Review

This article discusses how the State of Florida prosecutes under the new sentence enhancement provision of Florida’s anti-gang statute. Part I discusses the general history of the provision. Part II analyzes different state approaches to the enhancement provision. Finally, Part III concludes the article with two recommendations. First, a statutory response that provides all courts in the State with clear direction to implement this provision. Second, a judicial approach for Florida courts to consistently implement a provision that is essential to Florida’s war on criminal gangs.

Addict First, Criminal Second – Addiction Fueled Crimes Should Be Ineligible For The Three-Strikes Penalty, Scott Lindquist

Barry Law Review

The author of this article argues that drug addicts who finance their addiction through crime should be ineligible to receive a prison sentence under a recidivist statute like the three-strikes penalty. Part I introduces the problem, addiction and crime among current prisoners reported by the Department of Justice. Part II discusses Gary Ewing, an addict, a criminal, and a third strike offender. The story of Gary Ewing represents the injustices levied upon an addict/criminal by enhanced sentenced statutes like the three-strikes penalty. Part III is a discussion of the history of repeat offender statutes, primarily focusing on the inception of …

Strange Bedfellows: How The Ncaa And Ea Sports May Have Violated Antitrust And Right Of Publicity Laws To Make A Profit At The Exploitation Of Intercollegiate Amateurism, Andrew B. Carrabis

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

The 'Show' In The 'Show Trial': Contextualizing The Politicization Of The Courtroom, Awol K. Allo

Barry Law Review

Questioning the indifference of the law to its own normative correctness and its claim to legitimacy, this article explores the epistemological and ontological foundations upon which the concept and lexicon of show trial is predicated. By invoking the theory of performativity, the article distinguishes between the different models of show trials to allow for a more complex and nuanced reading of the particular nature of the show in judicial practices often called ‘show trials.’ By emphasizing the peculiarity of the ‘show’ in each ‘show trial’, the article seeks to reconceptualize the ambit of the criminal trial. Arguing against the emphasis …

Consent To Settle? A New Twist In The Tri-Partite Relationship, David F. Tavella

Barry Law Review

This article discusses the tri-partite relationship in litigation between insurers, the insured, and retained counsel. This article further discusses the complications for plaintiffs who wish to settle a case with defense counsel retained by the insurance carrier, and the ethical considerations that may arise under the Model Rules of Professional conduct when settlement is at the direction of the insurance carrier.

Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts: The Future Of The Confrontation Clause, Joseph Henn

Barry Law Review

The purpose of this article is to show the error in the majorities’ decision in Melendez-Diaz by approaching the issue from two perspectives. First, by investigating the cases and legal doctrines created by the Supreme Court in the years preceding Melendez-Diaz, this article will demonstrate why the case was erroneously decided. Second, this article explores the possibility that the majority decision was correct and thus the recently devised standard in Crawford v. Washington is inherently flawed. This article will further discuss the prior application of law before the Melendez-Diaz decision, offer analysis on the string of cases that led …

The Empty Tomb: Post-Critical Legal Hermeneutics, Peter Goodrich

Nevada Law Journal

There is nothing more refreshing than a successful failure. A momentary flaring of flamboyance. A near miss. Fifteen weeks as media monarchs; a good part—a small part—of a decade as a political threat to the order of the academy, if not the stability of the system. The affective bonds and the institutional disruption of youthful and latterly not-so-young dissidents and socialist sympathizers within the law schools definitely had their excitements, their impetus and novelties, and then they grew old, got rejected, disappeared into the shadows, backrooms, and faculty lounges. The various histories assign different figures to the failure of critical …

Ugly American Hermeneutics, Francis J. Mootz Iii

Nevada Law Journal

This article will appear in a Symposium on comparative legal hermeneutics that includes four articles by American scholars and four articles by Brazilian scholars. I argue that the "ugly American" hermeneutics exemplified in Justice Scalia's opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller is unfortunate, even if we supplement Justice Scalia's hermeneutical fantasy with the much more careful and balanced philosophical work by Larry Solum, Keith Whittington and other scholars. Nevertheless, the pragmatic work of interpretation by lawyers and judges in the day-to-day world of legal practice shows a plain-faced integrity of which we Americans can be proud.

Constitution, Human Rights And Republic: A Necessary Dialogue Between Gadamer's Philosophical Hermeneutics And Boaventura De Sousa Santos's Diatopic Heremeneutics, Jania Maria Lopes Saldanha, Jose Luis Bolzan De Morais

Nevada Law Journal

When we think about the concept of human rights—including all the possible ways of its realization, and considering the complementarities and also the unity of different dimensions of the concept—we confront several difficult questions. In particular, in an age when constitutions and constitutional doctrine have already incorporated a substantive body of human rights law, we must address how some of the constitutional promises regarding individual rights have not been fulfilled. Additionally, we must consider how rights that foster solidarity in the economic, social, and cultural spheres have not been recognized.

This article operates on two levels. On one level, we …

The Existential Subject Of Rights And Private Law: The Example Of The Indian Issue In Brazil, Jose Carlos Moreira Da Silva Filho

Nevada Law Journal

The issue of the juridical subject has been a topic of discussion as part of the rethinking of the classical jurisprudential concepts in Brazil. In particular, some authors have written about the “repersonalization of private law.” This has opened a promising path of inquiry regarding the legal subject for at least four major reasons. First, continental private law is the classical field to discuss the subject of rights. Second, the focus of private law remains the concept of the person, opening an important space to recover the moral philosophy in law. Third, the repersonalization of private law demonstrates the necessity …

Deconstructing The Models Of Judges: Legal Hermeneutics And Beyond The Subject-Object Paradigm, Lenio Luiz Streck

Nevada Law Journal

The linguistic-ontological turn has brought uncountable consequences to the interpretation of Law. However, dogmatic-legal knowledge remains hostage to a judicial protagonism, a philosophy of consciousness that, together with legal discretion, represent two sides of the same coin. The criticism of judicial discretion is a matter of democracy: decisions must be coherent, assuring the integrity of Law by reinforcing the normative power of the Constitution from which arises the need for correct answers in Law.

As Time Goes By: Hermeneutics And Originalism, John T. Valauri

Nevada Law Journal

What is the continuing relevance of hermeneutics to legal theory in general and to constitutional theory in particular if we are all originalists now? Both seem to be vital despite the decline of interest in hermeneutics recently. This article argues for the continuing relevance of hermeneutics to both fields because of the centrality of issues of application and practical reasoning in both. Law seeks for find the meaning of texts applied over time; legal texts are truly letters of transit. That we are all originalists, yet still have the same sort of interpretive debates we have always had, only indicates …

Legal Interpretation: The Window Of The Text As Transparent, Opaque, Or Translucent, George H. Taylor

Nevada Law Journal

It is a common metaphor that the text is a window onto the world that it depicts. I want to explore this metaphor and the insights it may offer us for better understanding legal interpretation. As in the opening epigraph from James Boyd White, I shall develop the metaphor of the text as window in three ways: the text may be transparent, opaque, or translucent. My goal will be to argue that the best way to understand legal interpretation is to conceive of the legal text as translucent, but along the way I will compare the merits also of considering …