Courts Commons^™

Amicus Curiae Brief Of The International Council Of Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers And Carol Logan In Support Of Appellants, Stephanie Hall Barclay, John A. Meiser

Court Briefs

No. 23-50746
Perez v. City of San Antonio

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas Honorable Fred Biery (5:23-cv-00977-FB)

From the Summary of the Argument

For centuries, generations of the Lipan-Apache people have gathered for prayer, mediation, and worship along a bend in the Yanaguana—known as the San Antonio River in English—which mirrors the constellation Eridanus in the skies above. It is a place where the lower, middle, and upper worlds come together; a place that reflects the Yanaguana creation story, which teaches that life began in the area when droplets of water fell …

Unopposed Motion Of The International Council Of Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers And Carol Logan To File Amicus Curiae Brief In Support Of Appellants, Stephanie Hall Barclay, John A. Meiser

Court Briefs

No. 23-50746
Perez v. City of San Antonio

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas Honorable Fred Biery (5:23-cv-00977-FB)

From the Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a)(3) and Fifth Circuit Rule 27.4, the International Council of Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers and Carol Logan respectfully move for leave to file a brief as amici curiae in support of Plaintiffs-Appellants Gary Perez and Matilde Torres. A copy of the proposed brief is attached to this motion.¹

Climate Change, Corruption, And Colonialism: Solving The Conundrum With Regional Courts, Taylor Nchako

Northwestern University Law Review

It is no secret that climate change is the most pressing issue of our times. Global South countries, especially those in Africa, face challenges mitigating the worst impacts of climate change, adapting technological solutions, and continuing to develop their nation’s infrastructure and industry. Cameroon provides an archetypal example of the challenges many African countries face. Plagued by an economy that both exacerbates climate change and stands to collapse from it, Cameroon struggles with corruption that has roots in colonialism and neocolonialism. This corruption taints not only the forestry service and the executive branch, but the judiciary as well, leaving Cameroon’s …

Advocate Training Session 1 Of 2, Cardozo Courtroom Advocates Project (Cap)

2023–2024 Flyers

No abstract provided.

2023 Women In Robes, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

St. Isidore Of Seville Catholic Virtual School's Motion To Intervene, Michael H. Mcginley, Steven A. Engel, M. Scott Proctor, John A. Meiser, Michael R. Perri, Socorro Adams Dooley

Court Briefs

No. 121694
Gentner Drummond v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board

From the Argument and Authority

This Motion to Intervene is both timely and amply supported. Courts assess the timeliness of a motion to intervene "in light of all the circumstances," including "the length of time since the movant knew of its interests in the case; prejudice to the existing parties; prejudice to the movant; and the existence of any unusual circumstances." Tulsa Indus. Auth. v. City of Tulsa, 2011 OK 57, ¶ 31, 270 P.3d 113, 128 (citation omitted) (looking to federal case law for guidance). Courts have …

The Collateral Fallout From The Quest For A Unitary Executive, Harold J. Krent

Fordham Law Review

To bolster a strong “Unitary Executive,” the Roberts Court has held that Congress can neither shield a single head of an administrative agency nor an inferior officer in an independent agency from removal at will. With respect to appointments, the Roberts Court has held that adjudicative officers in many executive agencies must now be appointed either by the President or a superior officer under the President’s supervision. As a result, dissenting Justices and academics have accused the Roberts Court of expanding Article II beyond both the constitutional text—which seemingly grants Congress the discretion to structure administrative agencies as it deems …

Evidence-Based Hearsay, Justin Sevier

Vanderbilt Law Review

The hearsay rule initially appears straightforward and sensible. It forbids witnesses from repeating secondhand, untested gossip in court, and who among us prefers to resolve legal disputes through untested gossip? Nonetheless, the rule's unpopularity in the legal profession is well-known and far-reaching. It is almost cliche to say that the rule confounds law students, confuses practicing attorneys, and vexes trial judges, who routinely make incorrect calls at trial with respect to hearsay admissibility. The rule fares no better in the halls of legal academia. Although defenses exist, scholars have unleashed a parade of pejoratives at the rule over the years, …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae California Catholic Conference In Support Of Plaintiffs-Appellants, John A. Meiser, Meredith Holland Kessler

Court Briefs

No. 23-55714
Chaya Loffman v. California Department of Education

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Honorable Josephine L. Staton (No. 2:23-cv-01832-JLS-MRW)

From the Argument

California’s exclusion of “sectarian” schools reflects a long history of efforts to suppress and demean disfavored religious groups in the United States.

The Case For Federal Deference To State Court Redistricting Rulings: Lessons From Ohio’S Districting Disaster, John Sullivan Baker

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In a watershed 2015 referendum, Ohioans decisively approved a state constitutional amendment that prohibited partisan gerrymandering of General Assembly districts and created the Ohio Redistricting Commission. Though the amendment mandated that the Commission draw proportional maps not primarily designed to favor or disfavor a political party, the Commission—composed of partisan elected officials—repeatedly enacted unconstitutional, heavily gerrymandered districting plans in blatant defiance of the Ohio Supreme Court.

After the Ohio Supreme Court struck down four of the Commission’s plans, leaving Ohio without state House and Senate maps just months before the 2022 general election, a group of voters sued in the …

Bureaucratic Overreach And The Role Of The Courts In Protecting Representative Democracy, Katie Cassady

Liberty University Journal of Statesmanship & Public Policy

The United States bureaucracy began as only four departments and has expanded to address nearly every issue of public life. While these bureaucratic agencies are ostensibly under congressional oversight and the supervision of the President as part of the executive branch, they consistently usurp their discretionary authority and bypass the Founding Fathers’ design of balancing legislative power in a bicameral Congress.

The Supreme Court holds an indispensable role in mitigating the overreach of executive agencies, yet the courts’ inability to hold bureaucrats accountable has diluted voters’ voices. Since the Supreme Court’s 1984 ruling in Chevron, U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense …

Law School News: A Courtroom Drama Worth Watching 10-22-2023, Suzi Morales

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Underage And Unprotected: Federal Grand Juries, Child Development, And The Systemic Failure To Protect Minors Subpoenaed As Witnesses, Lucy Litt

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Grand juries in the United States were originally intended to protect people from unwarranted criminal prosecution by the government; however, criticism of federal grand juries in the U.S. throughout the past five decades demonstrates that these deliberative bodies protect prosecutors at the expense of the people subjected to their investigations. Worse still, federal grand jury proceedings circumvent fundamental constitutional rights, direct judicial oversight, and many of the procedural protections of criminal trials; they enable prosecutors to strip unaccused individuals subpoenaed solely for witness testimony of their safety, rights, and liberty. Prosecutorial misconduct has received increasingly widespread attention, especially in recent …

Dna Analysis: The Answer For Unsolved Cases?, Sarah Hetchler

Master of Arts in Criminal Justice Leadership

DNA analysis has become a crucial part of solving cases. It has developed significantly since its creation in the mid-1980s. The longing for answers within unsolved cases is historically lengthy, leaving traces of distrust and injustice. Criminologists offer a potential solution to the mess created by connecting DNA analysis to protect victims and communities. DNA evidence and analysis can assist in solving cases and provide answers for exonerees. Like public genealogy websites, law enforcement agencies must acknowledge new methods to solve issues. Not only could law enforcement agencies solve and arrest suspects through DNA analysis, but DNA could also provide …

Brief Amicus Curiae Of The Bruderhof, Clear, The Jewish Coalition For Religious Liberty, And The Sikh Coalition In Support Of Rehearing En Banc, Francesca Matozzo

Court Briefs

No. 22-30686
Damon Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, No. 3:21-cv-733 The Honorable Shelly D. Dick, Chief Judge

From the Summary of the Argument

The Fifth Circuit should rehear en banc the panel decision in this case because it presents a “question of exceptional importance” under Fed. R. App. P. 35: whether the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) authorizes monetary damages. This issue is exceptionally important for two reasons.

America’S Two Pastimes: Baseball And Constitutional Law; Review Of Adrian Vermeule, Common Good Constitutionalism, Paul J. Larkin

Catholic University Law Review

For the last 50 years, the two prevailing constitutional interpretation methodologies have been Originalism and Living Constitutionalism. The former treats the Constitution almost like a contract and demands that interpreters focus on the ordinary contemporary understanding its terms would have received when they became law. The latter treats the Constitution as a charter for the structure of a new government that would survive and mature as needed to protect both the nation and its people as new threats to government and civil liberties arise. Professor Adrian Vermeule’s book Common Good Constitutionalism offers a new approach to constitutional interpretation, one that …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Clinic In Support Of Plaintiffs' Motion For Summary Judgment, Casey M. Nokes, Meredith Kessler

Court Briefs

No. 1:22-cv-00156-CL
St. Timothy's Episcopal Church v. City of Brookings

From the Argument

Congress unanimously enacted the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA) to provide sweeping protection for religious exercise against discrimination in land-use regulation. To accomplish this goal, the statute generally prohibits the government from implementing land-use regulations in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person or organization. And several provisions—including the statute’s capacious definition of “religious exercise” and its broad-construction mandate—emphasize the statute’s breadth.

On The Place Of Self-Defense In Public Life: A Hobbesian Critique Of The Supreme Court’S Second Amendment, Rafi Reznik

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

Contemporary Second Amendment law, which originated with the famous Heller decision (2008) and reached a new peak with Bruen (2022), relies on an implicit political theory. This article uncovers and critiques that theory. I argue that the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence positions interpersonal self-defense, and more generally individual response to crime, at the heart of the meaning of American citizenship. The paradigmatic citizen for whom state institutions should be designed is a self-defender, because, per the Court’s interpretive methodology, this is what the American people want. This line of cases thus attempts one of the most challenging feats of …

Unpuzzling Complete Preemption: Beneficial National Bank V. Anderson After Two Decades In The Circuit Courts, Anthony Salzetta

Pace Law Review

Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1 (2003), established the modern complete preemption doctrine—a method of finding removal jurisdiction by way of federal defense. The decision was met immediately with a great degree of confusion and critique by scholars concerned with the doctrine’s theoretical foundation (or lack thereof) and the potential disarray in its prospective execution by lower courts.

This twenty-year retrospective tackles whether clarity has emerged in the lower courts. By analyzing all 164 circuit court cases citing to Beneficial National Bank, I find minimal moments of disagreement between circuits as to application of the doctrine. Courts …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents