Courts Commons^™

The Opioid Litigation: The Fda Is Mia, Catherine M. Sharkey

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

It is readily agreed that federal preemption of state tort law alters the balance between federal and state power. Federal preemption is a high-profile defense in almost all modern products liability cases. It is thus surprising to see how little attention has been given to federal preemption by courts and commentators in the opioid litigation. Opioid litigation provides a lens through which I explore the role of state and federal courts and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in striking the right balance of power. My purpose here is not to resolve the divide among the few courts that have …

Food In Prison: An Eighth Amendment Violation Or Permissible Punishment?, Natasha M. Clark

Honors Thesis

This piece analyzes aspects such as; Eighth Amendment provisions, penology, case law, privatization and monopoly, and food law, that play into the constitutionality of privatized prisons using food as punishment. Prisoners have protection from excessive bail and fines and from cruel and unusual punishment, as per the 8^th Amendment; however, deprivations such as restricted diets and harm caused by them is only a valid violation if the prisoner can prove deliberate indifference. Privatization of the prison industry has led to reduced quality, choice, and diversity in areas such as food, which comes at a detrimental cost to prisoners. Serving …

Statistical Precedent: Allocating Judicial Attention, Ryan W. Copus

Vanderbilt Law Review

The U.S. Courts of Appeals were once admired for their wealth of judicial attention and for their generosity in distributing it. At least by legend, almost all cases were afforded what William Richman and William Reynolds have termed the “Learned Hand Treatment.” Guided by Judge Learned Hand’s commandment that “[t]hou shalt not ration justice,” a panel of three judges would read the briefs, hear oral argument, deliberate at length, and prepare multiple drafts of an opinion. Once finished, the judges would publish their opinion, binding themselves and their colleagues in accordance with the common-law tradition. The final opinion would be …

For Cause: Rethinking Racial Exclusion And The American Jury, Thomas Ward Frampton

Michigan Law Review

Peremptory strikes, and criticism of the permissive constitutional framework regulating them, have dominated the scholarship on race and the jury for the past several decades. But we have overlooked another important way in which the American jury reflects and reproduces racial hierarchies: massive racial disparities also pervade the use of challenges for cause. This Article examines challenges for cause and race in nearly 400 trials and, based on original archival research, presents a revisionist account of the Supreme Court’s three most recent Batson cases. It establishes that challenges for cause, no less than peremptory strikes, are an important—and unrecognized—vehicle of …

Human Rights In Indefinite Occupation: Palestine, Sari Bashi

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The article examines the tension between international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL) in the context of prolonged occupations, specifically focusing on Israel's 53-year occupation of Palestinian territory. It proposes a framework that integrates human rights norms, such as nondiscrimination and progressive realization of economic and social rights, into IHL to enhance protections for civilians under occupation. The analysis highlights the limitations of IHL in addressing long-term occupations and advocates for a more robust approach that balances military necessity with the welfare of the occupied population, while also addressing the challenges of enforcing these standards in the …

Terrible Touhy: Navigating Judicial Review Of An Agency's Response To Third-Party Subpoenas, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

The question of judicial review of a federal agency's response to a third-party subpoena is highly litigated and yet barely addressed in academic literature. For seventy years, this issue has been governed by the Supreme Court's holding in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, a case that spawned its own vocabulary, its own legal doctrine, and its own circuit split. The confusion has left four circuit courts entrenched, the remainder waffling, and the district courts largely on their own to sort out a workable standard.

This Article establishes that the circuit courts' approaches to judicial review of an agency's …

Paradigm Perplexities: Does International Humanitarian Law Or International Human Rights Law Govern The Gaza Border Protests Of 2018-2019, & What Are The Consequences? A Response To The Supreme Court’S Opinion In Yesh Din V. Idf Chief Of Staff (Hcj 3003/18), Anthony Carl

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The note critically examines the Israeli Supreme Court's ruling on the 2018 Gaza border protests, arguing that the Court's classification of the conflict as an international armed conflict (IAC) is legally flawed. This classification allowed the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to use live-fire policies under international humanitarian law (IHL), which the author contends is inappropriate for the context. The analysis asserts that the conflict should instead be treated as a non-international armed conflict (NIAC), with corresponding implications for the application of human rights law (IHRL). The Court's conflation of the law enforcement (LE) paradigm under IHL with the conduct of …

Law Library Blog (April 2020): Legal Beagle's Blog Archive, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

The Effects Of Anti-Immigrant Laws In The U.S. On Victims Of Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault, And Human Trafficking: A Gender-Based Human Rights Analysis, Caroline Bettinger-López, Jamila Flomo, Amanda Suarez

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Children Of Youtube: How An Entertainment Industry Goes Around Child Labor Laws, Neyza Guzman, J.D.

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Fertility Fraud And Proposal For Florida Legislation, Cheyenne Dunn

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Loophole In The Florida Notice Requirement For Foster Caregivers, Eve Lumsden

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Movement For Quality Government In Israel V. Speaker Of The Knesset, Esther Hayut, Hanan Melcer, Neal Hendel, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

Elections for the 23^rd Knesset were held on March 2, 2020, and the new Knesset was set to be sworn in on March 16, 2020. On March 15, 2020, in anticipation of the swearing in of the Knesset, several factions, comprising 61 Members of Knesset, requested that the acting Speaker of the Knesset, MK Yoel (Yuli) Edelstein, include a motion for the election of a permanent Speaker for the 23^rd Knesset on the agenda of that session. The Speaker refused.

Petitions challenging that decision were filed in the High Court of Justice by The Movement for Quality Government, …

Personal Jurisdiction And National Sovereignty, Ray Worthy Campbell

Washington and Lee Law Review

State sovereignty, once seemingly sidelined in personal jurisdiction analysis, has returned with a vengeance. Driven by the idea that states must not offend rival states in their jurisdictional reach, some justices have looked for specific targeting of individual states as individual states by the defendant in order to justify an assertion of personal jurisdiction. To allow cases to proceed based on national targeting alone, they argue, would diminish the sovereignty of any state that the defendant had specifically targeted.

This Article looks for the first time at how this emphasis on state sovereignty limits national sovereignty, especially where alien defendants …

The Dilemma Of Interstatutory Interpretation, Anuj C. Desai

Washington and Lee Law Review

Courts engage in interstatutory cross-referencing all the time, relying on one statute to help interpret another. Yet, neither courts nor scholars have ever had a satisfactory theory for determining when it is appropriate. Is it okay to rely on any other statute as an interpretive aid? Or, are there limits to the practice? If so, what are they? To assess when interstatutory cross-referencing is appropriate, I focus on one common form of the technique, the in pari materia doctrine. When a court concludes that two statutes are in pari materia or (translating the Latin) “on the same subject,” the court …

Supreme Court Journalism: From Law To Spectacle?, Barry Sullivan, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Washington and Lee Law Review

Few people outside certain specialized sectors of the press and the legal profession have any particular reason to read the increasingly voluminous opinions through which the Justices of the Supreme Court explain their interpretations of the Constitution and laws. Most of what the public knows about the Supreme Court necessarily comes from the press. That fact raises questions of considerable importance to the functioning of our constitutional democracy: How, for example, does the press describe the work of the Supreme Court? And has the way in which the press describes the work of the Court changed over the past several …

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Guideline To Remedy Ohio's Sentencing Disparities For White-Collar Criminal Defendants, Joelle Livorse

Cleveland State Law Review

Over the past few decades, white-collar crimes have significantly increased across the country, especially in Ohio. However, Ohio’s judges are ill-equipped to handle the influx of cases. Unlike federal judges who are guided by the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Ohio’s judges have significantly more sentencing discretion because the Ohio legislature provides minimal guidance for these crimes. As a result, Ohio’s white-collar criminal defendants are experiencing dramatic sentencing variations. To solve this problem, Ohio should look to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and neighboring states to adopt and create an innovative sentencing model tailored to white-collar crime. Unlike the federal …

A Brief Essay Defending The Doctrine Of Objective Chances As A Valid Theory For Introducing Evidence Of An Accused’S Uncharged Misconduct, Edward J. Imwinkelried

New Mexico Law Review

Rule 404(b) has been described as the most controversial of the Federal Rules of Evidence. In many states, errors in the admission of uncharged misconduct evidence are the most common ground for reversal in criminal cases. Testimony about an accused’s other crimes can be so prejudicial that it is “often virtually decisive of the whole case.”

It would be a mistake to jettison the character evidence prohibition altogether. Evidence reformers should focus on improving the administration of the doctrine of objective chances rather than seeking its abolition.

Fiduciary Injury And Citizen Enforcement Of The Emoluments Clause, Meredith M. Render

Notre Dame Law Review

The text of the Emoluments Clause provides no explicit enforcement mechanism, raising questions about who may enforce the Clause, and the mechanism by which it might be enforced. Is the Clause enforceable exclusively by collective action—such as an impeachment proceeding by Congress—or is it also enforceable by individual action—such as a private lawsuit? If the Emoluments Clause can be enforced by private action, who has standing to sue? In the absence of explicit textual guidance, a broader constitutional theory is required to render enforcement of the Clause coherent.

This Article presents that broader theory. The Article argues that the Emoluments …

Are Collateral Consequences Deserved?, Brian M. Murray

Notre Dame Law Review

While bipartisan passage of the First Step Act and state reforms like it will lead to changes in sentencing and release practices, they do little to combat the collateral consequences that exoffenders face upon release. Because collateral consequences involve the state’s infliction of serious harm on those who have been convicted or simply arrested, their existence requires justification. Many scholars classify them as punishment, but modern courts generally diverge, deferring to legislative labels that classify them as civil, regulatory measures. This label avoids having to address existing constitutional and legal constraints on punishment. This Article argues that although collateral consequences …