Legal Theory Commons^™

Contested Legality And The Insecurity Of Status: Some Snapshots From A Decade Of Refugee Law, Donald Galloway

Western Migration Conference Series

Bio:

Donald Galloway is a Professor of Law at the University of Victoria, British Columbia. He specializes in Refugee Law, Citizenship Law and Immigration Law. He was the founding President of the Canadian Association of Refugee and Forced Migration Studies (CARFMS) and is a former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Reviewing Racism And The Right To Marry: An Analysis Of Loving V. Virginia, Kathryn L. Jordan

Senior Honors Theses

Prior to the 1967 United States Supreme Court case of Loving v. Virginia, many states had laws that banned the intermarriage of whites with black or other minorities. Since then, the number of interracial marriages has increased and the attitudes of society have shifted. This thesis uses Loving as basis to explore the ways in which societal views have changed since the overruling of the anti-miscegenation statutes. It first discusses the culture in America before Loving and then, explains the details of the Loving case. This is then followed by a synopsis of how the culture changed after Loving. After …

Should Primates Have Legal Rights?, Hannah Barten, Zhimin Chen

Festival of Communities: UG Symposium (Posters)

A primate having legal rights is a controversial topic these days. Many other countries around the world support the idea of great apes having legal rights, because we for one are one of the five great primates. Others do not support this trending topic as much as others. These types of people believe that great apes such as chimpanzees are superb testing animals for medical purposes, because of the fact that they are closely related to mankind. Organizations such as Great Ape Protection, work towards protecting the rights of these great apes since they cannot speak for themselves. In many …

Globalization And Eligibility To Deliver Legal Advice: Inbound Legal Services Provided By Corporate Counsel Licensed Only In A Country Outside The United States, Carol A. Needham

San Diego Law Review

The regulation of cross-border delivery of legal services remains in flux. Clients in the United States, particularly sophisticated corporate clients, should be allowed to utilize the special expertise possessed by lawyers licensed outside the United States. Key reforms that at this point are gaining traction include the following: allowing lawyers licensed outside the United States to qualify for limited licenses as in-house counsel; broadening the scope of practice so that all foreign legal consultants are allowed to give legal advice related to third-country and international law; and allowing fly in, fly out practice while temporarily present in the host state. …

Facing The Unfaceable: Dealing With Prosecutorial Denial In Postconviction Cases Of Actual Innocence, Aviva Orenstein

San Diego Law Review

This Article develops a question that intrigued Fred: prosecutors’ duties postconviction to prisoners who might be innocent. Although Fred wrote about a panoply of questions that arise regarding the prosecutor’s duty to “do justice” after conviction, this Article will address one specific area of concern: how and why prosecutors resist allowing DNA testing and, more startlingly, deny the obvious implications of DNA evidence when that evidence exonerates the convicted.

Part II of this Article briefly summarizes two of Fred’s major articles on the subject of prosecutorial ethics. Part III documents the problem of postconviction DNA exonerations and prosecutors’ varied reactions. …

Federalizing Legal Ethics, Nationalizing Law Practice, And The Future Of The American Legal Profession In A Global Age, Eli Wald

San Diego Law Review

This Article is organized as a response to Zaharias’s influential paper, revisiting each of his four analytical steps. Following Zacharias, Part II documents the growing nationalization and globalization of law practice, and argues that the transformation of law practice renders the state-based regulation of lawyers ineffective. Part III parts ways with Zacharias’s thesis. It asserts that nationalizing, by federalizing, legal ethics is not warranted by changing practice realities and that, worse, federalizing legal ethics without more will leave some of the most troubling aspects of the transformation of law practice, including client needs, unaddressed. Instead, Part III argues that the …

Three Concepts Of Roles, W. Bradley Wendel

San Diego Law Review

There is something distinctive about the law, legal reasoning, and the role of lawyers. That distinctiveness is captured by the idea that normative reasoning by citizens in communities is necessarily aimed at discovering what rights and obligations everyone ought to have, consistent with the interests of other citizens. It is implausible to believe that ordinary moral reasoning is well-suited to working out a scheme of public entitlements that is suited to regulating the interactions among citizens who disagree about what their entitlements ought to be. The law has authority to the extent it enables people to do better than they …

Confidentiality And Common Sense: Insights From Philosophy, Thomas Morawetz

San Diego Law Review

In this Article, I will consider two aspects of the controversy that help explain why it is static. I will consider the significance of empirical evidence that lawyers and clients find the rules morally troubling. Zacharias plausibly assumes that such evidence carries compelling weight. I will also look at the nature of morality itself and the extent to which professional rules should be expected to conform to morality.

On The Connection Between Law And Justice, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

What does it mean to assert that judges should decide cases according to justice and not according to the law? Is there something incoherent in the question itself? That question will serve as our springboard in examining what is—or should be—the connection between justice and law. Legal and political theorists since the time of Plato have wrestled with the problem of whether justice is part of law or is simply a moral judgment about law. Nearly every writer on the subject has either concluded that justice is only a judgment about law or has offered no reason to support a …

What Will We Lose If The Trial Vanishes?, Robert P. Burns

Faculty Working Papers

The number of trials continues to decline andfederal civil trials have almost completely disappeared. This essay attempts to address the significance of this loss, to answer the obvious question, "So what?" It argues against taking a resigned or complacent attitude toward an important problem for our public culture. It presents a short description of the trial's internal structure, recounts different sorts of explanations, and offers an inventory of the kinds of wounds this development would inflict.

New Approaches To Customary International Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Reviews Eric A. Posner, The Perils of Global Legalism; Andrew T. Guzman, How International Law Works; Brian A. Lepard, Customary International Law.

After a century of benign neglect, international theorizing has taken off. The three contributors to legal theory reviewed here can be placed along a linear spectrum with Posner at the extreme political science end, Lepard at the opposite international law end and Andrew Guzman holding up the middle.

The Limits Of Constructivism: Can Rawls Condemn Female Genital Mutilation?, Andrew Koppelman

Faculty Working Papers

The strategy for coping with value pluralism that Rawls has proposed is to permit political decisions, at least with respect to basic rights, to depend only on those goods that can be inferred from the bare requirements of respectful relations between persons. His account offers such a parsimonious conception of the good that it cannot cognize some atrocities. I focus on one extreme human rights case: the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM), which, it is well established, violates basic human rights. Doubtless Rawls was appalled by the practice. Yet his theory cannot generate a basis for condemning it. A …

Non-State Actors From The Perspective Of The Policy-Oriented School: Power, Law, Actors And The View From New Haven, Anthony A. D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Law needs Power for enforcement of its rules; Power utilizes Law for creating conditions of stability that enhance its salience. Yet when the New Haven school tries to include international law in its power-oriented view of international relations, it ends up with a misleading two-dimensional descriptivism.

American Legal Theory And American Legal Education: A Snake Swallowing Its Tail?, John Henry Schlegel

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

The Political Economy Of Criminal Procedure Litigation, Anthony O'Rourke

Journal Articles

Criminal procedure has undergone several well-documented shifts in its doctrinal foundations since the Supreme Court first began to apply the Constitution’s criminal procedure protections to the States. This Article examines the ways in which the political economy of criminal litigation – specifically, the material conditions that determine which litigants are able to raise criminal procedure claims, and which of those litigants’ cases are appealed to the United States Supreme Court – has influenced these shifts. It offers a theoretical framework for understanding how the political economy of criminal litigation shapes constitutional doctrine, according to which an increase in the number …

The Psychological Foundations Of Behavioral Law And Economics, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Over the past decade, psychological research has enjoyed a rapidly expanding influence on legal scholarship. This expansion has established a new field—“Behavioral Law and Economics” (BLE). BLE’s principal insight is that human behavior commonly deviates from the predictions of rational choice theory in the marketplace, the election booth, and the courtroom. Because these deviations are predictable, and often harmful, legal rules can be crafted to reduce their undesirable influence. Ironically, BLE seldom recognizes that its intellectual origins lie with psychology more so than economics. This failure leaves BLE open to criticisms that can be answered only by embracing the underlying …

Gender Inequality In The Law: Deficiencies Of Battered Woman Syndrome And A New Solution To Closing The Gender Gap In Self-Defense Law, Meredith C. Doyle

CMC Senior Theses

Dr. Lenore Walker developed battered woman syndrome to address the issue of domestic violence and to give battered women a defense in situations in which they kill their abusive partners when they are not overtly threatening them. Self-defense law is based on male on male combat. Women are less able to protect themselves in an attack by a man, and so they may preemptively attack their sleeping partners to avoid a situation in which they cannot adequately protect themselves. Battered woman syndrome explains why these battered women act in a way that is irrational to a non-battered person. Walker's theory …

What Is Originalism? The Evolution Of Contemporary Originalist Theory, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Debates over “originalism” have been a central focus of contemporary constitutional theory for three decades. One of the features of this debate has been disagreement about what “originalism” is. More worrisome is the possibility that the arguments between contemporary originalists and their opponents, the “living constitutionalists”, are confused–-with each side of the debate making erroneous assumptions about the content of their opponent’s theories.

The aim of this chapter is to clarify these debates by providing a history of contemporary originalism and then developing an account of the core or focal content of originalist theory. The history reveals that contemporary originalist …

Wrongful Convictions As A Result Of Public Defender Representation., Annie Elizabeth Ross

Electronic Theses and Dissertations

Our criminal justice system works very hard to prevent criminals from harming other individuals; however, unfortunately mistakes happen. One wrongful conviction is one too many. There are multiple factors that can be assumed to be the cause of wrongful convictions. However, due to the lack of directly related research, the determents are not well established. The following research addresses wrongful convictions as a result of public defender representation. Through the process of theory construction, the research uses critical race theory and social disorganization theory to show the relationship between court appointed representation and wrongful convictions. A new theory is also …

The Intelligibility Of Extralegal State Action: A General Lesson For Debates On Public Emergencies And Legality, François Tanguay-Renaud

Articles & Book Chapters

Some legal theorists deny that states can conceivably act extralegally in the sense of acting contrary to domestic law. This position finds its most robust articulation in the writings of Hans Kelsen and has more recently been taken up by David Dyzenhaus in the context of his work on emergencies and legality. This paper seeks to demystify their arguments and ultimately contend that we can intelligibly speak of the state as a legal wrongdoer or a legally unauthorized actor.

Langdell And The Invention Of Legal Doctrine, Catharine Pierce Wells

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Aspects Of Deconstruction: The Failure Of The Word "Bird", Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Lawyers and judges often become impatient with those who dispute what they regard as the clear meaning of words. The meaning of words derives from the contexts in which they are employed, and we can never be certain of the context because we cannot enter into the minds of other persons to see the contexts to which their minds are adverting.

Self-Regulation Of Judicial Misconduct Could Be Mis-Regulation, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

No matter what the profession, any charge that a fellow professional is guilty of malpractice is a prima facie invitation to other professionals to retreat to a guild mentality, denying that the infraction took place. The impetus to cover up is not primarily due to friendship toward the accused but rather to a general perception that disclosure would lead to public disrespect of the profession as a whole. Many judges may feel that their own standing in the community could be undermined by disclosures that other judges invent or misstate facts. The issue here is not which judges have integrity, …

Aspects Of Deconstruction: Thought Control In Xanadu, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Nearly every case in nearly every legal system is a case where the factfinder—that is, the judge or jury—must decide what was going on in the minds of the litigants. For example, every criminal case turns on mens rea—a guess that the defendant harbored thoughts amounting to criminal intent. Tort cases involve the intention of the defendant, or at least his reckless indifference to risk. Estate cases require the probate court to assess the intent of the testator. Antitrust cases involve the question whether there was an intent to form a combination in restraint of trade. I can't think of …

The Effect Of Legal Theories On Judicial Decisions, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

I draw a distinction in the beginning of this essay between judicial decision-making and a judge's decision-making. To persuade a judge, we should try to discover what her theories are. Across a range of theories, I offered well-known case examples typically cited as examples of each theory. Then I showed that the exact same theory used to justify or explain those case results could be used to justify or explain the opposite result in each of those cases.

A Few Steps Toward An Explanatory Theory Of International Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

If any one sentence about international law has stood the test of time, it is Louis Henkin's: "almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law and almost all of their obligations almost all of the time." If this is true, why is this true? What makes it true? How do nations invent rules that then turn around and bind them? Are international rules simply pragmatic and expedient? Or do they embody values such as the need for international cooperation? Is international law a mixed game of conflict and cooperation because of its rules, or do its rules make …

All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee

College of Law - Faculty Scholarship

This paper contains the introduction to the new book, All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies and the Rule of Law (Stanford University Press, 2010).

The book begins with the observation that Americans are divided in their beliefs about whether courts operate on the basis of unbiased legal principle or of political interest. This division in public opinion in turn breeds suspicion that judges do not actually mean what they say, that judicial professions of impartiality are just fig leaves used to hide the pursuit of partisan purposes.

Comparing law to the practice of common courtesy, the …

The Ultimate Injustice: When A Court Misstates The Facts, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

This essay deals with what "the law" did to Dr. Branion, an American citizen, after the jury convicted him of murder in 1968. Under the American legal system, a defendant is entitled to have his case reviewed by a higher court, and, under certain circumstances, if the appellate review is unsuccessful, to present a petition for habeas corpus to a state or federal court. I will focus primarily on the stage of his litigation with which I am most familiar: his pursuit of a habeas remedy in federal court between 1986 and 1989. I will try to explain how one …

Aspects Of Deconstruction: The "Easy Case" Of The Under-Aged President, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

When the deconstructionist says that all cases are to some degree problematic, the mainstream legal scholar gleefully pulls out a favorite crystal-clear case and asserts "not this one!" Judging from the law review commentary, the most popular of these "easy cases" concerns the constitutional mandate that the President shall be at least thirty-five years of age. Deconstructionists say that all interpretation depends on context. Radical deconstructionists add that, because contexts can change, there can be no such thing as a single interpretation of any text that is absolute and unchanging for all time.

easy case, deconstruction in law, US Constitution …

Aspects Of Deconstruction: Refuting Indeterminacy With One Bold Thought, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Deconstruction has already happened on the Supreme Court. Not only can no member of the Court really believe that "the law" (self-invented by the very Court it is supposed to govern!) can constrain the result in any individual case, but its members have also convinced themselves that they have no time to be concerned with dispensing justice to the parties. The justificatory legal language used in judicial opinions is not what our law teachers told us it was. The justificatory legal language is not provided to explain—much less constrain—the result in the case. Rather, it is a mode of couching …