Courts Commons^™

Kekuatan Mengikat Akta Perdamaian (Acte Van Dading) Yang Dibuat Diluar Pengadilan Yang Isinya Berbeda Dengan Putusan Yang Sudah Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap (In Kracht Van Gewijsde), Dhimas Haris Anggara Mukti

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

This article discusses the legal force of peace deeds (acte van dading) made outside of court which contents are different from a legally binding decision (in kracht van gewijsde). The research used as writing material is research using philosophical approaches, normative juridical methods and literature review, which is carried out by examining library materials or secondary data. The results of the research conclude that a peace agreement is valid according to law if it meets the requirements set out in statutory regulations, either in the form of a private agreement or an authentic deed, which will have power for the …

A Modern-Day 3/5 Compromise: The Case For Finding Prison Gerrymandering Unconstitutional Under The Thirteenth Amendment, Shana Iden

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Vestiges of slavery and systemic disenfranchisement of people of color persist in the United States. One of these remnants is the practice of prison gerrymandering, which occurs when government officials count incarcerated individuals as part of the population of the prison’s location rather than the individual’s home district. This Article argues that prison gerrymandering functions as a badge of slavery that should be prohibited under the Thirteenth Amendment.

First, this Article provides background on prison gerrymandering and charts its impact through history, particularly on Black communities. Moreover, this Article analyzes how litigation under the Fourteenth Amendment has not yielded meaningful …

A Constitutional Right To Early Voting, David Schultz

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Voting is a cost-benefit decision. Individuals are more likely to vote if the benefits of doing so outweigh the disadvantages. With early voting laws eased due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2020 election demonstrated that turnout increases when elected officials reduce voting costs. Despite all the benefits of early voting, there is no constitutional right, and it remains a privilege that state legislatures can revoke at will.

Since the 2020 election, state legislatures have proposed—and enacted—hundreds of bills to change voting rules. But with the intense partisan disagreement over voting, coupled with political polarization reaching an apex, these acts restricting …

Moore V. Harper And The Consequential Effects Of The Independent State Legislature Theory, Chase Cooper

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In December 2022, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. Harper. The case addresses whether the North Carolina Supreme Court possesses the authority to strike down a redistricting map drawn by the state legislature. Petitioners contend that the state legislature has no such authority under the United States Constitution, citing a novel interpretation of the Elections Clause known as the “independent state legislature” (“ISL”) theory. The ISL theory is not a unified theory, but rather a constellation of related doctrinal positions that revolve around a core precept: ordinary governing principles by which state courts review …

Rucho In The States: Districting Cases And The Nature Of State Judicial Power, Chad M. Oldfather

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Warren Circuit Court - Warren County, Kentucky (Sc 3682), Manuscripts & Folklife Archives

Manuscript Collection Finding Aids

Finding aid and scans (Click on "Additional Files" below) for Manuscripts Small Collection 3682. Images of two seals of the Warren County (Kentucky) Circuit Court, one affixed to documents dated 1825 and 1839, and the other to a document dated 1860, together with a letter from the Court Administrator with historical background. Also includes a paper by an unknown author describing the Warren County Court of Quarter Sessions and a few early indictments.

Overview Of Missouri Appellate Briefing Rules And The Case Of Hicks V. Northland-Smithville, Steve Lockwood

SLU Law Journal Online

Starting with the Missouri Supreme Court's 2022 opinion in Lexow v. Boeing Co., appellate courts have put renewed emphasis on the requirements of Rule 84.04. The recent opinion by the Western District Court of Appeals, Hicks v. Northland-Smithville, and several predecessor opinions to Hicks, are a lesson and reminder to practitioners to strictly adhere to the Missouri Rules of Appellate Procedure, specifically Rule 84.04. In this article, Steve Lockwood will discuss Hicks and the implications of the opinion.

Core And Periphery In Constitutional Law, R. George Wright

William & Mary Law Review Online

This paper embarks on an excursion through a number of the most vital constitutional rights cases, and other contexts as well, and seeks to show that the recurring judicial attempts to distinguish between core and peripheral areas within any given broad constitutional right are unnecessary and distracting. Intriguingly, the case for this conclusion varies significantly depending upon the nature of the general constitutional right in question. But the overall lesson is that courts should abandon their attempts to distinguish between core and peripheral areas of any given broad constitutional right. Courts should instead focus—directly or indirectly—on their best assessment of …

Brief Of Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Clinic As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, John A. Meiser, Meredith Holland Kessler

Court Briefs

No. 22-741
Faith Bible Chapel International v. Gregory Tucker

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The First Amendment demands that courts refrain from intruding into disputes over a religious organization’s selection of important leaders. The ministerial exception enforces that demand. And thus, nearly every court to consider the issue has agreed: the ministerial exception promises something akin to an immunity from suit, which must be resolved early in litigation to be effective.

Home Court Advantage? An Empirical Analysis Of Local Bias In U.S. District Court Diversity Jurisdiction Cases, Kyle C. Kopko, Christopher J. Devine

West Virginia Law Review

In granting diversity of citizenship jurisdiction to the federal courts, there is an underlying assumption that federal courts will be less biased toward out-of-state litigants as compared with state courts. While this may be true, the assumption fails to consider an important empirical question: to what extent do federal courts favor home state litigants or disfavor out-of-state litigants when deciding diversity jurisdiction cases? Relying on the Integrated Database (IDB) compiled by the Federal Judicial Center and the Administrative Offices of the U.S. Courts, we present an original, empirical analysis of diversity jurisdiction case outcomes in the U.S. districts courts from …

What's Originalism After Transunion?: Picking An Originalist Approach That Gets Standing Back On Track, Julian Gregorio

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Note argues that not only is standing fascinating and contested, but it is so important that the Court should reconsider standing doctrine in appropriate future cases. While the TransUnion case came and went without much kerfuffle outside of legal circles, standing does not find itself sailing smoothly. As noted, perhaps the Court’s most reliable originalist just dissented from a case that largely restates the current law on standing. And Justice Kagan, perhaps the Court’s most influential liberal, wrote that after TransUnion, standing jurisprudence “needs a rewrite.” Given the current makeup of the Court, any reconsideration of standing doctrine …

Fugitive Pull: Applying The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine To Foreign Defendants, Zachary Z. Schroeder

Washington Law Review

Defendants force courts to decide whether to use judicial time and resources to hear a case when they either flee or refuse to submit to jurisdiction. Judges in the United States possess an exceptional discretionary power to deny access to the courts in these circumstances through the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. The fugitive disentitlement doctrine developed as federal common law and permits courts to exercise discretion in declining to hear appeals or motions from defendants classified as fugitives from justice.

Historically, the fugitive disentitlement doctrine was intended to prevent courts from wasting resources adjudicating cases when a defendant has fled and …

A Renewed Analysis Of The Expedited Actions Rules In Texas Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Lindsey Wylie, Miriam Hamilton, Brittany K. T. Kauffman, Logan Cornett, James Swearingen, Michael Houlberg, Jeffrey Tsunekawa, Michael Smith, Sheri Woodfin,

Faculty Publications

In October 2021, the Texas Office of Court Administration (OCA) and the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) returned to the question of whether the Expedited Action Rules (EARs) adopted in 2012 in Texas were continuing to have a positive impact on civil case processing. With new funding from the State Justice Institute (SJI), the NCSC, OCA, and the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, set out to replicate a 2016 study. Using the same research methods, the project team gathered data from the district and county courts in Dallas, Fort Bend, …

Grandma Got Arrested: Police, Excessive Force, And People With Dementia, Rashmi Goel

University of Richmond Law Review

Recent events have shone a light on the particular vulnerability of people with dementia to police violence. Police are arresting people with dementia and using excessive force to do it—drawing their firearms, deploying tasers, and breaking bones.

To date, little attention has been paid to the burgeoning number of people with dementia, one of society’s most vulnerable populations, and their experiences with the criminal justice system. This Article examines how dementia leads people to engage in activity that appears criminal (shoplifting (forgetting to pay), and trespass (wandering), for instance) and the disproportionate response of police. In several cases where people …

Solving Slapp Slop, Nicole J. Ligon

University of Richmond Law Review

In a substantial minority of states, wealthy and powerful individuals can, without much consequence, bring defamation lawsuits against the press and concerned citizens to silence and intimidate them. These lawsuits, known as “strategic lawsuits against public participation” (“SLAPP”s), are brought not to compensate a wrongfully injured person, but rather to discourage the defendants from exercising their First Amendment rights. In other words, when well resourced individuals feel disrespected by public criticism, they sometimes sue the media or concerned citizens, forcing these speakers to defend themselves in exorbitantly expensive defamation actions. In states without anti-SLAPP statutes—statutes aimed at protecting speakers from …

Zombies Attack Inadvertent Partnerships!—How Undead Precedents Killed By Uniform Statutes Still Roam The Reporters, Joseph K. Leahy

University of Richmond Law Review

Recently, the Texas Supreme Court breathed new life into some ancient zombies—zombie precedents, that is!—which have long lurked in the shadows of the nation’s partnership formation caselaw. This Article tells the story of those undead cases—describing them, debunking them, and plotting their demise.

This zombie tale begins with the supposed black-letter law of partnership formation. In nearly every state, formation of a general partnership is governed by one of two uniform partnership acts. Under both acts, a business relationship ripens into a partnership whenever the statutory definition of partnership is satisfied. The parties’ intent to become “partners” (or not) is …

Resolving Regulatory Threats To Tenure, Joseph W. Yockey

University of Richmond Law Review

Many lawmakers and public university governing boards are looking to curb faculty tenure. Driven by both ideological and economic motives, recent efforts range from eliminating tenure systems altogether to interfering when schools seek to tenure individual, often controversial scholars. These actions raise serious questions about higher education law and policy and have important implications for the future of academic freedom. Indeed, if they gain further traction, current regulatory threats to tenure will jeopardize the ability of American universities to remain at the forefront of global research and intellectual progress.

This Article examines the growing anti-tenure sentiment among state officials and …

Conditional Purging Of Wills, Mark Glover

University of Richmond Law Review

The laws of most states unconditionally purge a testamentary gift to an individual who serves as an attesting witness to the will. Under this approach, the will is valid despite the presence of an interested witness, but the witness forfeits all, some, or none of her gift, depending on the particularities of state law. While the outcome of the interested witness’s gift varies amongst the states that adhere to this majority approach, the determination of what the interested witnesses can retain is the same. The only consideration is whether the beneficiary is also a witness; whether her gift is purged …

The Legal Ethics Of Family Separation, Milan Markovic

University of Richmond Law Review

On April 6, 2018, the Trump administration announced a “zero tolerance” policy for individuals who crossed the U.S. border illegally. As part of this policy, the administration prosecuted parents with minor children for unlawful entry; previous administrations generally placed families in civil removal proceedings. Since U.S. law does not allow children to be held in immigration detention facilities pending their parents’ prosecution, the new policy caused thousands of children to be separated from their parents. Hundreds of families have yet to be reunited.

Despite a consensus that the family separation policy was cruel and ineffective, there has been minimal focus …

Cftc & Sec: The Wild West Of Cryptocurrency Regulation, Taylor Anne Moffett

University of Richmond Law Review

Over the past few years, a turf war has been brewing between the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) over which agency should regulate cryptocurrencies. Both agencies have pursued numerous enforcement actions over the cryptocurrencies they believe to be within their jurisdiction. This turf war has many moving components, but the focus always comes back to one question: which cryptocurrencies are commodities, and which cryptocurrencies are securities? The distinction is important because the CFTC has statutory authority to regulate commodities, whereas the SEC has statutory authority to regulate securities. This Comment rejects the pursuit …