Courts Commons^™

The Vanishing Core Of Judicial Independence, Evan C. Zoldan

Nevada Law Journal

With Congress firmly in control of the jurisdiction, resources, and structure of the federal courts, the scope of the judiciary’s independence is limited indeed. If there is an attribute that can be considered the core of judicial independence, it is the power of the federal courts to decide cases pending before them. In a pair of recent decisions, however, the Supreme Court has called into question whether the federal judiciary possesses even this limited attribute of independence. This Article examines how the Court has blurred the line between the judicial and legislative powers by ceding to Congress the authority to …

“Remarkable Influence”: The Unexpected Importance Of Justice Scalia's Deceptively Unanimous And Contested Majority Opinions, Linda L. Berger, Eric C. Nystrom

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

May It Please The Court–Or Not: Appellate Judges' Preferences And Pet Peeves About Oral Argument, Margaret D. Mcgaughey

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Nature Of Standing, Matthew Hall, Christian Turner

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Most academic studies of standing have focused on restrictions on federal court jurisdiction drawn from Article III of U.S. Constitution and related doctrinal schemes developed by state courts. These rules are constructed atop a few words of the Constitution: "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity," arising under various circumstances. The Supreme Court has interpreted these words to require federal courts to assess whether a plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact that is both fairly traceable to the actions of the defendant and redressable by a favorable ruling before proceeding to the merits of …

The Constitution And Democracy In Troubled Times, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

Does textualism and originalism approach positively impact democracy?

The Power Of Suggestion: Can A Judicial Standing Order Disrupt A Norm?, Kimberly A. Jolson

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Rule-Based Solution To The Appellate Body Crisis And Why The Mpia Would Not Work, Henry Gao

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Over the past three years, the United States have been persistently blocking the appointment of members to the WTO Appellate Body, citing various concerns with its alleged “failure to follow the agreed rules”. The US blockage has resulted in an unprecedented crisis of the WTO dispute settlement system, which finally led to the paralysis of the Appellate Body in December 2019 when its member was reduced to the last one.

Initially focusing on the minor procedural errors of specific Appellate Body members, the US criticisms on the Appellate Body has morphed into broader attacks on the substantive jurisprudence and judicial …

Blowing Hot And Cold In Litigation: Abuse Of Process, Election Or Approbation And Reprobation? Bwg V Bwf [2020] Sgca 36, Dorcas Quek Anderson

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

This note analyses the Singapore Court of Appeal’s decision in BWG v BWF which allowed the adoption of inconsistent positions across related court proceedings against different parties. The decision raises crucial questions on the limits to be imposed on a party’s freedom to pursue opposing rights in litigation, and how the doctrines of abuse of process, election by waiver, and approbation and reprobation should be applied. It is argued that the court’s application of the abuse of process doctrine obscured the central exercise of assessing all the relevant interests and circumstances. The differing rationales underlying the common law doctrine of …

California V. Texas: The Role Of Congressional Procedure In Severability Doctrine, Mary Leto Pareja

Faculty Scholarship

The United States Supreme Court is once again considering a case that challenges the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). In this round of litigation, plaintiffs argue that because Congress lowered the individual mandate tax penalty to zero in the 2017 Tax Act that makes the individual mandate itself unconstitutional and that, furthermore, the individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the ACA. The District Court agreed with the plaintiffs and struck down the entire ACA, and the Supreme Court granted cert to hear this momentous question. A decision is expected by summer of 2021.

The ACA …

The Doctrine Of Clarifications, Pat Mcdonell

Michigan Law Review

Clarifications are a longstanding but little-studied concept in statutory interpretation. Most courts have found that clarifying amendments to preexisting statutes bypass retroactivity limitations. Therein lies their power. Because clarifications simply restate the law, they do not implicate the presumption against retroactivity that Landgraf v. USI Film Products embedded in civil-statute interpretation. The problem that courts have yet to address is how exactly clarifying legislation can be distinguished from legislation that substantively changes the law. What exactly is a clarification? The courts’ answers implicate many of the entrenched debates in statutory interpretation. This Note offers three primary contributions. First, it summarizes …

Jack Weinstein: Reimagining The Role Of The District Court Judge, Jessica A. Roth

Articles

This essay, for a symposium issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter dedicated to the impact of Judge Jack Weinstein on the occasion of his retirement from the federal bench, highlights how Judge Weinstein has re-imagined the role of the district court judge. Through his judicial opinions, extrajudicial writings and speeches, and his innovative use of the court’s supervisory authority, Judge Weinstein has challenged, and in some cases altered, the status quo in the realm of criminal sentencing. In doing so, he has established a forceful example of how district court judges can use their position to advocate for and effect …

Deportation Arrest Warrants, Lindsay Nash

Articles

The common conception of a constitutionally sufficient warrant is one reflecting a judicial determination of probable cause, the idea being that the warrant process serves to check law enforcement. But neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court has fully defined who can issue arrest warrants within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment; the constitutional significance of arrest “warrants” that are not; or when (if ever) warrants of any type are constitutionally required for deportation-related arrests. In that void, the largest federal law enforcement agency—the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—is on pace to issue over 150,000 administrative “warrants” annually, authorized by …

Against Congressional Case Snatching, Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Atticus Deprospro

William & Mary Law Review

Congress has developed a deeply problematic habit of aggrandizing itself by snatching cases from the Article III courts. One form of contemporary case snatching involves directly legislating the outcome of pending litigation by statute. These laws do not involve generic amendments to existing statutes but rather dictate specific rulings by the Article III courts in particular cases. Another form of congressional case snatching involves rendering ongoing judicial proceedings essentially advisory by unilaterally permitting a disgruntled litigant to transfer a pending case from an Article III court to an executive agency for resolution. Both practices involve Congress reallocating the business of …

Judging Patents, Sapna Kumar

William & Mary Law Review

Patent litigation is regarded as the “neurosurgery of litigation.” To adjudicate these cases, judges must grasp complex technology underlying the claims at issue, notwithstanding the fact that many judges lack relevant science or technology backgrounds. This problem is compounded by the fact that judges generally lack access to neutral expertise, forcing them to rely upon party-hired experts for tutorials. By contrast, several European patent courts utilize technically qualified judges who work side by side with their legally trained counterparts to decide patent cases. The integration of technical expertise into the judiciary improves the speed of litigation, provides the court with …

Designing Legal Experiences, Maximilian A. Bulinski, J.J. Prescott

Book Chapters

Technological advancements are improving how courts operate by changing the way they handle proceedings and interact with litigants. Court Innovations is a socially minded software startup that enables citizens, law enforcement, and courts to resolve legal matters through Matterhorn, an online communication and dispute resolution platform. Matterhorn was conceived at the University of Michigan Law School and successfully piloted in two Michigan district courts beginning in 2014. The platform now operates in over 40 courts and in at least eight states, and it has facilitated the resolution of more than 40,000 cases to date. These numbers will continue to grow …

The Evolving Technology-Augmented Courtroombefore, During, And After The Pandemic, Fredric I. Lederer

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Even before the COVID-19 Pandemic, technology was changing the nature of America’s courtrooms. Access to case management and e-filing data and documents coupled with electronic display of information and evidence at trial, remote appearances, electronic court records, and assistive technology for those with disabilities defined the technology-augmented trial courtroom. With the advent of the Pandemic and the need for social distancing, numerous courts moved to remote appearances, virtual hearings, and even virtual trials. This Article reviews the nature of technology-augmented courtrooms and discusses virtual hearings and trials at length, reviewing legality, technology, human factors, and public acceptance, and concludes that …

Egyptian Public Law Judge: Reviewing Public Economic Policies From Nationalization To Privatization, Omar El Menshawy

Theses and Dissertations

Do public law judges play a role in public economic policies in Egypt? Egypt has witnessed rough changes, leading to the adoption of different public economic policies. Public law judges have played a key role in these economic shifts. However, the efficacy of this role is pending on the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the government with the courts and the judicial decisions. This paper argues that the government posses the upper hand in dealing with the judicial influence in economic issues in Egypt. The paper scrutinizes the transformation in the judicial attitude towards government economic policies. Specifically, the paper demarcates …

Mobile Methadone Clinics: A Necessary Step In Fighting The Opioid Epidemic, Laurel E. Via

University of Richmond Law Review

Part I of this Article will discuss the rise in opioid use disorder, the need for effective treatment, and the utility of methadone maintenance treatment options, as well as the history of the ban on mobile clinics. Part II will discuss the NPRM issued by the DEA on February 26, 2020, and explain the likely impact of the rule. Part III will provide an overview of the NPRM in its current form, explain its likely impact as written and show that mobile clinics are effective treatment options, and then argue that while a great start, the NPRM should be amended …

Religious Exemptions As Rational Social Policy, Justin W. Aimonetti, M. Christian Talley

University of Richmond Law Review

In its 1963 decision Sherbert v. Verner, the Supreme Court interpreted the Free Exercise Clause to permit religious exemptions from general laws that incidentally burdened religious practice. Sherbert, in theory, provided stringent protections for religious freedom. But those protections came at a price. Religious adherents could secure exemptions even if they had no evidence the laws they challenged unfairly targeted their religious conduct. And they could thereby undermine the policy objectives those laws sought to achieve. Because of such policy concerns, the Court progressively restricted the availability of religious exemptions. In its 1990 decision Employment Division v. Smith …

The Reality Of Class-Action Appeals, Christine P. Bartholomew

Book Reviews

Reviewing Bryan Lammon, An Empirical Study of Class-Action Appeals (2020).