Courts Commons^™

Some Realism About Choice-Of-Law Statutes And The Common Law: The Oregon Example, John T. Parry

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Choice-of-law doctrine presents perpetual change. Common law doctrine is the primary driver of these changes, but change and reform need not come from common law alone. As Robert Leflar once observed, “it should not make much difference whether a governing choice-of-law rule . . . is found in the common law or in a statute. The same rule might be formulated in either way.” This Article assess the utility of choice-of-law statutes, on their own merits and as a substitute for common law reform. The Article begins by surveying the choice-of-law landscape, with its twin problems of multiplicity of methods …

Judicial Independence And The Rule Of Law, D. Brooks Smith

Lewis & Clark Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Terms Of Their Deal: Revitalizing The Treaty Right To Limit State Jurisdiction In Indian Country, Dylan R. Hedden-Nicely

Lewis & Clark Law Review

For over 200 years, the “whole course of judicial decision” in the United States has recognized that American Indian tribes possess inherent sovereignty to govern their lands and people. Federal recognition of that sovereignty was memorialized in countless treaties, congressionally ratified agreements, and executive orders setting aside reservations throughout the United States. Throughout that same period, and with only minimal exception, the judiciary faithfully applied those treaties to protect tribal property rights, recognize tribal sovereignty, and bar states from imposing jurisdiction within Indian Country.

The jurisprudence in this arena has shifted, however, over the past few decades. Although the Supreme …

Juvenile Competency Restoration, David R. Katner

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Despite legal competence presumptions about juveniles facing delinquency charges, tens of thousands of forensic mental health evaluations challenge the status of court-involved children in the United States each year. Researchers now find mental health disorders prevalent among juveniles in the justice system, with up to 70% having a diagnosable mental health problem. It is inappropriate to think of adolescents as younger versions of adults whose behaviors can be viewed through the same lens as adult behaviors. The Article will explore some of the causes and conclusions about why many juveniles are not competent and why many of them may not …

Confirm Rachel Bloomekatz To The Sixth Circuit, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Now that the United States Senate is convening after the July Fourth holiday, the upper chamber must promptly appoint Rachel Bloomekatz to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The nominee, whom President Joe Biden selected in May 2022, provides remarkable experiential, gender, and ideological expertise that she deftly realized in litigating high-profile gun control, environmental, and other significant cases in federal appellate courts and district courts. Over fifteen years, the nominee has reached law’s pantheon across a broad spectrum from extremely prestigious clerkships with Justice Stephen Breyer and particularly distinguished federal court and state court jurists to …

Taking Corrigibility Seriously, Dora Klein

Faculty Articles

This article argues that the Supreme Court's creation of a category of "irreparably corrupt" juveniles is not only an epistemological mistake but also a tactical mistake which has undermined the Court's express desire that only in the "rarest" of cases will juveniles be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Originalism And The Meaning Of "Twenty Dollars", Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

Originalism claims to provide answers, or at least assistance, for those hoping to interpret a Constitution filled with wide-ranging, morally loaded terminology. Originalists claim that looking to the original public meaning of the Constitution will constrain interpreters, maintain consistency and predictability in judicial decisions, and is faithful to ideals like democratic legitimacy. This essay responds with the inevitable, tough question: whether originalism can tell interpreters what the Seventh Amendment's reference to "twenty dollars" means--both as a matter of original meaning and for interpreters today.

While this appears to be an easy question, I demonstrate that rather than telling modern legal …

A “Rhode” Block On The Journey To The American Dream, Jesse Manning

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Changemakers: Elevating Conversations Around Indigenous Peoples' Rights, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Easing The Burden Of Survivors Of Domestic Violence Through The "One Family, One Judge" Court Model: Why Integrated Domestic Violence ("Idv") Courts Should Be Instituted Throughout The United States, Elka B. Blonder

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note advocates for the implementation of Integrated Domestic Violence (IDV) Courts nationwide, arguing that these courts provide a more efficient and supportive system for survivors of domestic violence by consolidating criminal, civil, and family cases under a single judge. This "one family, one judge" model aims to reduce the fragmentation and trauma survivors face in traditional court systems, offering a holistic approach that enhances survivor safety and offender accountability.

Inside Out, Upside Down: Circuit Court Confusion Over Character Copyrightability, Caitlin E. Oh

Emory Law Journal

Enormous amounts of new content are posted on social media every day. Ordinarily, if a work is original and created by the author, the work is automatically protected under copyright without the need for registration. However, in recent years, copyright protection has become difficult to obtain for one type of expression: fictional characters.

Today, characters hold immense cultural significance. For some, characters provide an escape from reality, entertainment, and, in some cases, a blueprint to which one can aspire. For entertainment studios, characters hold immense economic value. If a character is popular—holding cultural significance—a studio might create a prequel or …

The City Suit, Zachary D. Clopton, Nadav Shoked

Emory Law Journal

This Article addresses the role of local governments in the most American of activities: the lawsuit. During the last few decades, city litigation has grown more proactive, diverse, and prominent. Cities now frequently file lawsuits respecting the most notable issues of the day. Each of these suits involves specific policy concerns peculiar to its subject matter, but as a group—as a legal phenomenon—they all raise common, and disputed, doctrinal questions pertaining to standing, local preemption, res judicata, state immunity, and more.

When tackling these diverse doctrinal issues—sounding in both civil procedure and local government law—courts and scholars have failed to …

Taxes, Administrative Law, And Agency Expertise: Questioning The Orthodoxy, Scott Schumacher

Articles

One of the foundations of administrative law is that federal agencies and their employees are experts in their respective fields. In addition, the many judgments and decisions made by these experts are based on a thorough record after extensive factfinding. As a result, so the theory goes, courts, particularly courts of general jurisdiction like the United States District Courts, should give deference to the determinations made by these experts. But what if the facts underpinning this foundation are not true in all cases? Should courts nevertheless provide deference to decisions by agencies when it is evident that an agency's determinations …

Due Process Deportations, Angelica Chazaro

Articles

Should pro-immigrant advocates pursue federally funded counsel for all immigrants facing deportation? For most pro-immigrant advocates and scholars, the answer is self-evident: More lawyers for immigrants would mean more justice for immigrants, and thus, the federal government should fund such lawyers. Moreover, the argument goes, federally funded counsel for immigrants would improve due process and fairness, as well as make immigration enforcement more efficient. This Article argues the opposite: Federally funded counsel is the wrong goal. The majority of expulsions of immigrants now happen outside immigration courts— and thus are impervious to immigration lawyering. Even for those who make it …

Women, International Human Rights Law, And The Right To Adequate Housing In Africa, John Mukum Mbaku

Emory International Law Review

In many African countries, the rights of women and girls to adequate housing are under threat and remain vulnerable to violation by state- and non-state actors. This is so even though these rights are guaranteed by international human rights instruments and national constitutions. Of particular note is the existence of customary laws that discriminate against women and frustrate their ability to realize the right to adequate housing. To enhance the ability of women to realize their right to adequate housing, each African State must domesticate the various international and regional human rights instruments that guarantee this right in order to …

Liability Beyond Law: Conceptions Of Fairness In Chinese Tort Cases, Rachel E. Stern, Benjamin L. Liebman, Wenwa Gao, Xiaohan Wu

Faculty Scholarship

Empirical work consistently finds that Chinese courts resolve civil cases by finding a compromise solution. But beyond this split-it-down-the-middle tendency, when and how do Chinese courts arrive at decisions that feel “fair and just” in cases in which they invoke those ideas? Drawing on a data set of 9,485 tort cases, we find that Chinese courts impose liability on two types of parties with ethical, but not legal, obligation to victims: (1) participants in a shared activity and (2) those who control a physical space. In these cases, Chinese courts stretch the law to spread losses through communities and to …

Reviewing Mixed Questions Of Fact And Law In Administrative Adjudications: Why Courts Should Move To “Substantially Established Facts”, Gwendolyn Savitz

Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works

Courts are inconsistent in how they review mixed questions of fact and law in administrative adjudications. Many courts simply and unquestioningly review the entire mixed issue using only substantial evidence review. This grants extreme and unquestioning deference to any legal interpretation used by the agency, far more than would be available to it under the increasingly besieged Chevron doctrine, despite the fact that the adjudications being reviewed in this manner generally would not even be entitled to Chevron deference if the legal component of the mixed question were analyzed separately. Courts should therefore analyze the different components of a mixed …

American University Law Review Keynote Address, Erwin Chemerinsky

American University Law Review

My talk this morning focuses on the agenda of the current Roberts Court. I think that every Supreme Court can be said to have an agenda. Sometimes it seems conscious and deliberate, apparent from the outset. Sometimes it seems to evolve and only becomes obvious later.

The Purcell Principle And The Antiblackness Of Constitutional Fundamentalism, Brittany Carter

American University Law Review

In Milligan v. Merrill, a district court in Alabama found that the state legislature designed Alabama’s new congressional district map in a way that diminished Black political power, and ordered the legislature to redraw its map to remedy the violation. Two weeks later, the Supreme Court stayed the district court’s order, allowing Alabama’s congressional elections to proceed under the discriminatory maps. The only stated rationale, offered by Justices Kavanaugh and Alito in a concurring opinion, was the so-called Purcell principle – the notion that federal courts should not enjoin a state’s election laws in the period close to an election. …

The Absurd Reach Of A "Colorblind" Constitution, David Hinojosa, Genevieve Bonadies Torres

American University Law Review

Affirmative action has long spurred debates over whether the Equal Protection Clause and subsequent civil rights legislation were intended to permit policies aimed at disrupting racial hierarchies, dismantling systemic discrimination, and ensuring equal opportunity for Black people and other historically marginalized groups. The current lawsuits pending before the Supreme Court challenging affirmative action admissions programs at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) and Harvard College are no exception. Like prior lawsuits, the plaintiff in both cases—Students for Fair Admissions (“SFFA”)—and its amici seek to turn back the clock on racial diversity at selective universities by urging the …