Courts Commons^™

Here There Be Dragons: The Likely Interaction Of Judges With The Artificial Intelligence Ecosystem, Fredric I. Lederer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Can The International Criminal Court Succeed? An Analysis Of The Empirical Evidence Of Violence Prevention, Stuart Ford

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

Despite significant optimism about the future of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) during its early years, recently there has been growing criticism of it by both scholars and governments. As a result, there appears to be more doubt about the ICC’s ability to succeed now than at any other point in its history. So, are the critics correct? Is the ICC failing? No. This Article argues that, not only can the ICC succeed, there is strong evidence that it is already succeeding. It analyzes several recent empirical articles that have convincingly demonstrated that the ICC prevents serious violations of international …

Experiments With Suppression: The Evolution Of Repressive Legality In Britain In The Revolutionary Period, Christopher M. Roberts

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

This article is concerned with the structure of repressive governance, and how it has evolved historically. It examines this theme through an exploration of the manner which repressive laws and institutions evolved in Britain over the course of the late eighteenth century. In particular, it reviews the various measures that British authorities utilized and relied upon in order to confront a growing wave of calls for social and political reforms. These included a policy of aggressive prosecutions of dissidents; the creation of new institutions such as the Home Office designed to enhance the powers of the central authorities; extralegal measures …

Small Claims Disputes In Nova Scotia And Access To Justice, William H. Charles

Dalhousie Law Journal

The author examines, in some detail, the current operations of the Nova Scotia Small Claims Court to determine whether the court, established forty years ago, is still fulfilling its legislative mandates of providing ready access to speedy, informal and inexpensive justice. After reviewing historical attempts by the legal system to provide an effective mechanism to adjudicate minor disputes, and the various factors that eventually resulted in the creation of the present court in 1980, the author identifies a number of other factors that historically had a negative impact on the operation of the court. Many of these, involving court jurisdiction, …

Standing, Still? The Evolution Of The Doctrine Of Standing In The American And Israeli Judiciaries: A Comparative Perspective, Joshua Hoyt

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The doctrine of standing plays an important role in limiting the classes of cases or controversies that are appropriate for judicial resolution; considered with other justiciability doctrines, judicial standing necessarily reflects the broader role of the court in society. Though the American judiciary had rather generous standing policies in place at the time of the founding, with the rise of the administrative state in the aftermath of the New Deal, progressive justices saw fit to restrict judicial standing as a means of insulating regulatory programs from industry challenge. In contradistinction, the young Israeli society has some of the most accessible …

Legalizing Midwifery In Missouri, Michael A. Wolff

All Faculty Scholarship

Two decades after the Missouri Supreme Court upheld an injunction against the practice of midwifery, two midwives became lobbyists for the cause and, with the remarkable cooperation of friendly legislators and lobbyists, got a provision inserted in a health bill legalizing the practice of tocology, a synonym for midwifery that went unnoticed by legislators who voted for the lengthy bill in which it was inserted. Medical associations sued to invalidate this "stealth" provision but their efforts failed when the Missouri Supreme Court declined to grant standing to the doctors to "protect" the interests of the public. Thirteen years later, the …

Intervenors At The Supreme Court Of Canada, Geoffrey D. Callaghan

Dalhousie Law Journal

My aim in this paper is to offer a normatively attractive and explanatorily sound interpretation of the Supreme Court of Canada’s approach to third party intervention. The crux of my interpretation is that the policy the Court has developed on intervenors allows it to strike a reasonable balance among a number of competing democratic considerations, all of which have value in the context of judicial decision making. In this respect, the Court should be commended for identifying a way to liberalize a practice that possesses many democratically-attractive features, but also the inherent capacity to undermine the democratic standing of the …

Tinkering With Circuit Conflicts Beyond The Schoolhouse Gate, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Circumventing Standing To Appeal, Ryan W. Scott

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The requirement of standing to sue in federal court is familiar, but the related requirement of standing to appeal within the Article III judiciary is badly undertheorized. The Supreme Court’s opinions suggest (at least) four constitutional rationales. Standing to appeal might serve the same functional purposes as standing to sue, or it might follow from the fact that appeals involve two separate courts, or it might be triggered because the underlying case or controversy has become moot, or because it has reached the point of final judgment.

Compounding the confusion, the requirement of standing to appeal can have troubling consequences …

Diverse And Inclusive High Courts: A Global And Intersectional Perspective, Alice J. Kang, Miki Caul Kittilson, Valerie Hoekstra, Maria C. Escobar-Lemmon

Department of Political Science: Faculty Publications

Critical race feminists call attention to the ways in which multiple and overlapping forms of privilege and discrimination shape individual experiences and perspectives. In this article, we argue that judiciaries cannot be fully inclusive if their composition does not reflect a society’s intersecting sources of disadvantage. We consider intersectional inclusion on high courts from a compar-ative perspective. Most existing practices of representation on high courts promote the inclusion of groups as if they are internally homogenous. We explore the attempts at and successes of promoting intersectional inclusion in the context of the high courts of Canada and South Africa. Although …

The Adjudication Business, Pamela K. Bookman

Faculty Scholarship

The recent proliferation of international commercial courts around the world is changing the global business of adjudication. The rise of these courts also challenges the traditional accounts of the competitive relationship between and among courts and arbitral tribunals for this business. London and New York have long been considered the forum of choice in international commercial contracts—whether parties opt for litigation or arbitration. More recently, however, English-language-friendly international commercial courts have been established in China (2018), Singapore (2015), Qatar (2009), Dubai (2004), the Netherlands (2019), Germany (2018), France (2010), and beyond.

The emerging scholarship addressing these new courts tends to …

The Innovation & Limitation Of Arbitral Courts, Pamela K. Bookman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Herman Melville’S Billy Budd: Why This Classic Law And Literature Novel Endures And Is Still Relevant Today, Rodger Citron

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Case-Linked Jurisdiction And Busybody States, Howard M. Erichson, John C.P. Goldberg, Benjamin Zipursky

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Interring The Immigration Rule Of Lenity, Patrick J. Glen

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The immigration rule of lenity has haunted immigration jurisprudence since its initial iteration in 1947. But as with any spectral entity, its existence is more ephemeral than real. The rule was meant to be a tie-breaker of sorts, a canon that where a provision of the immigration laws was ambiguous, the courts should impose the more lenient construction. It has never, however, been the dispositive basis for a holding of the Supreme Court. Rather, to the extent it has been referenced, it has been trotted out only as a rhetorical device to sanction a decision reached on other grounds. Even …

The Genius Of Hamilton And The Birth Of The Modern Theory Of The Judiciary, William M. Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In late May 1788, with the essays of the Federalist on the Congress (Article I) and the Executive (Article II) completed, Alexander Hamilton turned, finally, to Article III and the judiciary. The Federalist’s essays 78 to 83 – the essays on the judiciary - had limited effect on ratification. No newspaper outside New York reprinted them, and they appeared very late in the ratification process – after eight states had ratified. But, if these essays had little immediate impact – essentially limited to the ratification debates in New York and, perhaps, Virginia – they were a stunning intellectual achievement. Modern …

Packing And Unpacking State Courts, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

When it comes to court packing, questions of “should” and “can” are inextricably intertwined. The conventional wisdom has long been that federal court packing is something the President and Congress simply cannot do. Even though the Constitution’s text does not directly prohibit expanding or contracting the size of courts for political gain, many have argued that there is a longstanding norm against doing so, stemming from a commitment to judicial independence and separation of powers. And so (the argument goes), even though the political branches might otherwise be tempted to add or subtract seats to change the Court’s ideological makeup, …

The Paradoxical Impact Of Scalia's Campaign Against Legislative History, Stuart Minor Benjamin, Kristen M. Renberg

Faculty Scholarship

Beginning in 1985, Judge and then Justice Antonin Scalia advocated forcefully against the use of legislative history in statutory interpretation. Justice Scalia’s position, in line with his textualism, was that legislative history was irrelevant and judges should avoid invoking it. Reactions to his attacks among Justices and prominent circuit judges had an ideological quality, with greater support from ideological conservatives. In this Article, we consider the role that political party and timing of judicial nomination played in circuit judges’ use of legislative history. Specifically, we hypothesize that Republican circuit judges were more likely to respond to the attacks on legislative …

Reign Of Error: District Courts Misreading The Supreme Court Over Rooker–Feldman Analysis, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Edward L. Baskauskas

Faculty Scholarship

Seventeen decisions in nine U.S. district courts from 2006 through 2019 have taken a demonstrably misgrounded starting point for Rooker–Feldman analysis. The cases have read language from a 2006 Supreme Court opinion, in which the Court quoted criteria stated by the lower court, as their guideline. But the Court summarily vacated the lower court’s judgment, and it had previously articulated, and has repeated, different criteria for federal courts to follow. The district-court decisions all appear to have reached correct results, but the mistake about criteria should be recognized and avoided as soon as possible before it creates potential mischief. And …

Avoiding Judicial Discipline, Veronica Root Martinez

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past several years, several high-profile complaints have been levied against Article III judges alleging improper conduct. Many of these complaints, however, were dismissed without investigation after the judge in question removed themselves from the jurisdiction of the circuit’s judicial council—oftentimes through retirement and once through elevation to the Supreme Court. When judges—the literal arbiters of justice within American society—are able to elude oversight of their own potential misconduct, it puts the legitimacy of the judiciary and the rule of law in jeopardy.

This Essay argues that it is imperative that mechanisms are adopted that will ensure investigations into …