Jurisprudence Commons^™

Recovering Forgotten Struggles Over The Constitutional Meaning Of Equality, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Justice Scalia's Bottom-Up Approach To Shaping The Law, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Justice Antonin Scalia is among the most famous Supreme Court Justices in history. He is known for his originalism and conservative positions, as well as his witty and acerbic legal opinions. One of the reasons Justice Scalia's opinions are so memorable is his effective use of rhetorical devices, which convey colorful images and understandable ideas. One might expect that such powerful opinions would be effective in shaping the law, but Justice Scalia's judicial philosophy was often too conservative to persuade a majority of his fellow Justices on the Supreme Court. Further, his regular criticisms of his Supreme Court colleagues were …

Justice Scalia, The 2016 Presidential Election, And The Future Of Church-State Relations, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

What If Fiduciary Obligations Are Like Contractual Ones?, Gregory Klass

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay, to appear in Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law (Miller & Gold, 2016), explores three ways fiduciary obligations might be like contractual ones: in the methods lawmakers use or should use to determine the content of the obligation; in the private voluntary acts that generate the obligation; and in the fact that the obligation is a default that parties have the power to alter. The thesis is that to the extent that these similarities exist, they are not especially revealing. Theorists who emphasize the similarities commonly treat contract law as a private power-conferring rule, then analogize the law of …

Originalism’S Bite, William Baude, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

Is originalism toothless? Richard Posner seems to think so. He writes that repeated theorizing by "intelligent originalists," one of us happily included, has rendered the theory "incoherent" and capable of supporting almost any result. We appreciate the attention, but we fear we've been misunderstood. Our view is that originalism permits arguments from precedent, changed circumstances, or whatever you like, but only to the extent that they lawfully derive from the law of the founding. This kind of originalism, surprisingly common in American legal practice, is catholic in theory but exacting in application. It might look tame, but it has bite.

Toward A Political Theory For Private International Law, John Linarelli

Scholarly Works

Private international law presents a dilemma for legal and political philosophy. Legal and political philosophers have ignored private international law, with only a few scattered attempts to evaluate its claims. Private international law offers a powerful set of counterexamples that put into serious doubt attempts to link law’s authority only or primarily to relationships between states and citizens. No society, state, or other practice-mediated relationship can serve as grounds for the authority of private international law to persons to whom it applies but who are outside of such relationships. Private international law affects the normative situations of persons entirely outside …

Strategic And Tactical Totalization In The Totalitarian Epoch, Adam J. Macleod

Faculty Articles

This article examines the totalization of private law by public authorities. It compares and contrasts the fate of private law in totalitarian regimes with the role of private law in contemporary, non-totalitarian liberal democracies. It briefly examines the Socialist jurisprudence of the former Soviet Union and its treatment of private law. It offers an explanation why private law might be inimical to the jurisprudence of the Soviet Union and totalitarian regimes more generally. It next examines the totalization of law accomplished by segregationist regimes in the mid-twentieth century, comparing and contrasting those regimes with totalitarian regimes. Then it turns to …

Specifically Authorized By Binding Precedent Does Not Mean Suggested By Persuasive Precedent: Applying Good-Faith Exception After Davis V. United States, Zachary C. Bolitho

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Administrative Jurisprudence: The Rule Of Law In The Administrative State, Kevin M. Stack

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Essay offers a specification of the rule of law's demands of administrative law and government inspired by Professor Peter L. Strauss's scholarship. It identifies five principles'authorization, notice, justification, coherence, and procedural fairness which provide a framework for an account of the rule of law's demands of administrative governance. Together these principles have intriguing results for the evaluation of administrative law. On the one hand, they reveal rule-of-law foundations for some contested positions, such as a restrictive view of the President's power to direct subordinate officials and giving weight to an agency's determination of the scope of its own authority. …

A Corporation Has No Soul, And Doesn't Go To Church: Relating The Doctrine Or Piercing The Veil To Burwell V. Hobby Lobby, Carol Goforth

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

On The "Poverty Of Responsibility": A Study Of The History Of Child Protection Law And Jurisprudence In Nova Scotia, Ilana Luther

PhD Dissertations

This thesis presents a history of child protection law and jurisprudence in Nova Scotia. The thesis begins by examining the development of the first child protection statute in Canada, the Nova Scotia Prevention and Punishment of Wrongs to Children Act in 1882. The Act was developed amidst a climate of reform in late-19th century Halifax, at the urging of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The Act, along with a number of other pieces of “domestic relations” legislation at the time, was focused on protecting children in poverty. With the passing of the Act, the legislature not …

Justice As Friendship: Book Review, Wei Yao, Kenny Chng

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Dr. Tan Seow Hon’s book, Justice As Friendship: A Theory of Law (Ashgate, 2015), presents a unique and compelling argument for the proposition that law can be justified by extra-legal moral principles elucidated through the heuristic device of friendship.

Franz Kafka’S “Before The Law”: A Parable, Geoffrey L. Brackett

Pace Law Review

Despite Francis Bacon’s cautionary note, I have always been a fan of parables, and perhaps the most poignant one to speak for perils of the legal profession is Franz Kafka’s “Vor dem Gesetz” (“Before the Law”), one of the relatively few works to be published in his lifetime. It was seen first in the almanac Vom Jüngsten Tag: Ein Almanach Neuer Dichtung in December 1915 before it was included in his novel Der Prozess (The Trial), which was unpublished in his lifetime. He wrote it at one sitting on December 13, 1914, and in fewer than 650 words, Kafka illustrates …

The Third Pillar Of Jurisprudence: Social Legal Theory, Brian Z. Tamanaha

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

O'Connor's Firsts, Phyllis L. Crocker

Akron Law Review

Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor will make her mark on the Ohio court system and on the laws of Ohio in many ways. She made two significant marks her first day as Chief Justice: she was the first woman elected to the position of Chief Justice in Ohio and in her swearing-in speech she called for review of the death penalty in Ohio.1 Both were meaningful to me personally and as a citizen of Ohio. I appreciated her acknowledging her place in history and her willingness to tackle, right from the beginning of her tenure, the important topic of the death …

Flexible Predictability: Stare Decisis In Ohio, Richard Garner

Akron Law Review

This Article explores the need for a doctrine permitting, but limiting, the overruling of prior precedent; Ohio’s adoption of such a rule; and whether the current standard will endure. To fully appreciate the need for a rule that permits but also limits the overruling of prior Supreme Court precedent, it is helpful to understand the historical context in which the Galatis rule developed. Section II of this Article discusses the political and ideological changes that swept the Ohio judiciary in the early 1990s with the election of two new Justices to the Ohio Supreme Court. The new Justices quickly set …

The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson

Marquette Law Review

The Supreme Court’s attempt to create a standard for evaluating whether the Establishment Clause is violated by religious governmental speech, such as the public display of the Ten Commandments or the Pledge of Allegiance, is a total failure. The Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has been termed “convoluted,” “a muddled mess,” and “a polite lie.” Unwilling to either allow all governmental religious speech or ban it entirely, the Court is in need of a coherent standard for distinguishing the permissible from the unconstitutional. Thus far, no Justice has offered such a standard.

A careful reading of the history of the framing …

The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s attempt to create a standard for evaluating whether the Establishment Clause is violated by religious governmental speech, such as the public display of the Ten Commandments or the Pledge of Allegiance, is a total failure. The Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has been termed “convoluted,” “a muddled mess,” and “a polite lie.” Unwilling to either allow all governmental religious speech or ban it entirely, the Court is in need of a coherent standard for distinguishing the permissible from the unconstitutional. Thus far, no Justice has offered such a standard.

A careful reading of the history of the framing …

When Rules Are Made To Be Broken, Zev J. Eigen, David S. Sherwyn, Nicholas F. Menillo

Northwestern University Law Review

When do judges follow rules expected to produce unjust results, and when do they intentionally misapply such rules to avoid injustice? Judicial rule-breaking is commonly observed when national dignity and morality are at stake, such as abolitionist judges charged with applying federal fugitive slave laws, or when lives hang in the balance, such as applications of criminal sentencing rules. Much less is understood about judicial rule-breaking in quotidian civil litigation, in spite of the sizeable impact on litigants and potential litigants, as well as the frequency with which judges face such decisions. This Article is the first to theoretically assess …

Temporal Arbitrariness: A Back To The Future Look At A Twenty-Five-Year-Old Death Penalty Trial, Mary Kelly Tate

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Search Of The Real Roberts Court, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Prosecuting Generals For War Crimes The Shifting Sands Of Accomplice Liability In International Criminal Law, Mark A. Summers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Eighth Amendment Analysis Of Statutes Allowing Or Mandating Transfer Of Juvenile Offenders To Adult Criminal Court In Light Of The Supreme Court's Recent Jurisprudence Recognizing Developmental Neuroscience, Katherine I. Puzone

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Surprising Acquittals In The Gotovina And Perisic Cases: Is The Icty Appeals Chamber A Trial Chamber In Sheep's Clothing, Mark A. Summers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Are Physician-Patient Communications Protected By The First Amendment?, Martha Swartz

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

In the past several years, a number of states have enacted laws restricting physicians’ rights to speak freely with their patients. These laws go beyond informed consent laws enacted in most states in the 1960s and 1970s. While the informed consent laws require physicians to provide certain categories of information to patients prior to invasive treatment—such as the nature of the risks and benefits entailed—these new laws either prohibit physicians from discussing certain topics or mandate that they provide specific information to their patients that is only questionably supported by medical evidence. In the past several years, a number of …

All Together Now: Using Principles Of Group Dynamics To Train Better Jurors, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

We ask juries to make important decisions that have a profound impact on people’s lives. We leave these decisions in the hands of groups of laypeople because we hope that the diverse range of experiences and knowledge in the group will lead to more thoughtful and informed decisionmaking. Studies suggest that diverse groups of jurors have different perspectives on evidence, engage in more thorough debate, and more closely evaluate facts. At the same time, there are a variety of problems associated with group decisionmaking, from the loss of individual motivation in group settings, to the vulnerability of groups to various …

A Rhetorician’S Practical Wisdom, Linda L. Berger

Scholarly Works

For three years, I had the great good fortune to work in the office next to Jack Sammons. My good fortune extended to a coincidence of timing that allowed me to work with Jack on a co-authored article, The Law's Mystery. During the time I worked next door, I felt cursed by an inability to grasp concepts that to Jack appeared inevitable and essential, whether those inevitabilities and essences were to be found within the law, good lawyering, or good legal education. The curse persisted throughout the writing of The Law's Mystery.

For Jack, the essence of a …

Some Reasons Courts Have Become Active Participants In The Search For Ultimate Moral And Political Truth, George C. Christie

Faculty Scholarship

This short essay was prompted by the increasing delegation to courts of the responsibility for deciding what are basically moral questions, such as in litigation involving human rights conventions, as well as the responsibility for deciding basic issues of social policy with at best only the most general guidelines to guide their exercise of judicial discretion. The essay discusses some of the reasons for this delegation of authority and briefly describes how courts have struggled to meet this obligation without transcending accepted notions governing the limits of judicial discretion.

The Ancient Magna Carta And The Modern Rule Of Law: 1215 To 2015., Vincent R. Johnson

St. Mary's Law Journal

This article argues the text of the Magna Carta, now 800 years old, and reflects many of the values that are at the center of the modern concept of the Rule of Law. A careful review of its provisions reveals the Magna Carta demonstrates a strong commitment to the resolution of disputes based on rules and procedures that are consistent, accessible, transparent, and fair; and to the development of a legal system characterized by official accountability and respect for human dignity.

Why Law Matters For Our Obligations, Guyora Binder

Journal Articles

Political philosophers have long debated the problem of political and legal obligation: how the existence of a political community and its laws can affect our obligations. This paper applies Alon Harel’s argument that law has intrinsic value to this venerable problem. It interprets Harel’s argument as a Kantian claim that law enables us to treat our fellows with the respect they deserve, by requiring us not only to treat them decently, but to recognize decent treatment as their right.