Originalism And Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth Amendment,
2018
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Originalism And Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth Amendment, Christopher W. Schmidt
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
In this Essay, I argue that originalism conflicts with the Supreme Court’s current jurisprudence defining the scope of Congress’ power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the standard established in Boerne v. Flores, the Court limits congressional power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to statutory remedies premised on judicially defined interpretations of Fourteenth Amendment rights. A commitment to originalism as a method of judicial constitutional interpretation challenges the premise of judicial interpretive supremacy in Section 5 jurisprudence in two ways. First, as a matter of history, an originalist reading of Section 5 provides support for broad judicial …
Substantial Shifts In Supreme Court Health Law Jurisprudence,
2018
Georgetown University
Substantial Shifts In Supreme Court Health Law Jurisprudence, Lawrence O. Gostin, James G. Hodge
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
President Trump’s nomination of jurist Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court presents significant, potential changes on health law and policy issues. If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Kavanaugh’s approaches as a federal appellate court judge and scholar could literally shift the Court’s balance on consequential health policies. Judge Kavanaugh has disavowed broad discretion for federal agency authorities, cast significant doubts on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, and narrowly interpreted reproductive rights (most notably abortion services). He has supported gun rights pursuant to the Second Amendment beyond U.S. Supreme Court recent interpretations. His varying positions related to consumer …
Law School News The First Circuit At Rwu Law 10/03/2018,
2018
Roger Williams University School of Law
Law School News The First Circuit At Rwu Law 10/03/2018, Michael M. Bowden, Julia Rubin
Life of the Law School (1993- )
No abstract provided.
Law School News: Appeals Court Hears Labor Arguments At Roger Williams University School Of Law 10-2-2018,
2018
Providence Journal
Law School News: Appeals Court Hears Labor Arguments At Roger Williams University School Of Law 10-2-2018, Katie Mulvaney, Roger Williams University School Of Law
Life of the Law School (1993- )
No abstract provided.
The Elephant In The Room: Helping Delaware Courts Develop Law To End Systemic Short-Term Bias In Corporate Decision-Making,
2018
Susman Godfrey L.L.P.
The Elephant In The Room: Helping Delaware Courts Develop Law To End Systemic Short-Term Bias In Corporate Decision-Making, Kenneth Mcneil, Keith Johnson
Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review
Short-termism in corporate decision-making is as problematic for long-term investors as relying on a three-mile radar on a supertanker. It is totally inadequate for handling the long-term risks and opportunities faced by the modern corporation. Yet recent empirical research shows that up to 85% of the S&P 1500 have no long-term planning. This is costing pension funds and other long-term investors dearly. For instance, the small minority of companies that do long-term planning and risk management had a long-term profitability that was 81% higher than their peers during the 2001–2014 period—with less stock volatility that costs investors dearly as well. …
Jury Selection In The Weeds: Whither The Democratic Shore?,
2018
University of Texas at Austin
Jury Selection In The Weeds: Whither The Democratic Shore?, Jeffrey Abramson
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Article reports on four federal jury challenges in which the trial judge or defendants retained the author to provide research on jury selection plans. The research shows a persistent and substantial loss of representation for African Americans and Hispanics on federal juries, even though no intentional discrimination took place. Problems with undeliverable jury summonses, as well as failure to respond to summonses, were the main causes of departures from the ideal of cross-sectional jury selection. However, a cramped understanding of what it takes for a defendant to prove that minority jurors were systematically excluded, as required by Duren v. …
Introduction,
2018
Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Introduction, Shari S. Diamond, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
Experts bedeviled the legal system long before seventeenth-century Salem, when the town's good citizens relied on youthful accusers and witchcraft experts to identify the devil's servants in their midst. As in Salem, claims of expertise have often been questioned and objections raised about the bases of expert knowledge. Expertise, then and now, did not have to be based on science; but the importance of science and the testimony of scientific experts has since medieval times been woven into the fabric of the English jurisprudence that Americans inherited. In cases as long ago as 1299 we find examples of courts seeking …
Pothole Laws, Appellate Courts, And Judicial Drift,
2018
University of Arkansas Little Rock
Pothole Laws, Appellate Courts, And Judicial Drift, Kenneth L. Gartner
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
This article begins by describing the structure of the appellate system in New York state, introducing the features of the typical New York pothole law, and summarizing the New York cases that set the substantive and procedural background for a discussion and analysis of judicial drift.
Widening The Lens: Refocusing The Litigation Cost-And-Delay Narrative,
2018
New York University School of Law
Widening The Lens: Refocusing The Litigation Cost-And-Delay Narrative, Arthur R. Miller
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Statutory Interpretation And The Rest Of The Iceberg: Divergences Between The Lower Federal Courts And The Supreme Court,
2018
William & Mary Law School
Statutory Interpretation And The Rest Of The Iceberg: Divergences Between The Lower Federal Courts And The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
This Article examines the methods of statutory interpretation used by the lower federal courts, especially the federal district courts, and compares those methods to the practices of the U.S. Supreme Court. This novel research reveals both similarities across courts and some striking differences. The research shows that some interpretive tools are highly overrepresented in the Supreme Court’s decisions, while other tools are much more prevalent in the lower courts. Differences in prevalence persist even after accounting for the selection effect that stems from the Supreme Court’s discretionary docket. Another finding—based on a study of 40 years of cases from all …
Fire, Aim, Ready! Militarizing Animus: “Unit Cohesion” And The Transgender Ban,
2018
Penn State Dickinson Law
Fire, Aim, Ready! Militarizing Animus: “Unit Cohesion” And The Transgender Ban, Eric Merriam
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
President Trump’s currently litigated “transgender ban,” which excludes transgender persons from military service, is premised in part upon a claim that transgender persons’ presence in the military adversely affects “unit cohesion.” This use of identity- based “unit cohesion” as a justification for excluding a group from military service is the latest episode in a long history of the government asserting “unit cohesion” to justify excluding people from military service based on their identities. This Article contends that unit cohesion, when premised on identity, is always an impermissible justification for exclusion from military service because it is unconstitutional animus. Though …
Visibly (Un)Just: The Optics Of Grand Jury Secrecy And Police Violence,
2018
Penn State Dickinson Law
Visibly (Un)Just: The Optics Of Grand Jury Secrecy And Police Violence, Nicole Smith Futrell
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
Police violence has become more visible to the public through racial justice activism and social justice advocates’ use of technology. Yet, the heightened visibility of policing has had limited impact on transparency and accountability in the legal process, particularly when a grand jury is empaneled to determine whether to issue an indictment in a case of police violence. When a grand jury decides not to indict, the requirement of grand jury secrecy prevents public disclosure of the testimony, witnesses, and evidence presented to the grand jury. Grand jury secrecy leaves those who have seen and experienced the act of police …
Supreme Verbosity: The Roberts Court's Expanding Legacy,
2018
Texas A&M University School of Law
Supreme Verbosity: The Roberts Court's Expanding Legacy, Mary Margaret Penrose
Faculty Scholarship
The link between courts and the public is the written word. With rare exceptions, it is through judicial opinions that courts communicate with litigants, lawyers, other courts, and the community. Whatever the court’s statutory and constitutional status, the written word, in the end, is the source and the measure of the court’s authority.
It is therefore not enough that a decision be correct—it must also be fair and reasonable and readily understood. The burden of the judicial opinion is to explain and to persuade and to satisfy the world that the decision is principled and sound. What the court says, …
Nineteen Minutes Of Horror: Insights From The Scorpions Execution Video,
2018
Utrecht University
Nineteen Minutes Of Horror: Insights From The Scorpions Execution Video, Iva Vukušić
Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal
After the fall of Srebrenica in summer of 1995, the Scorpions unit, dispatched to support the Bosnian Serb Army as it took over the enclave, shot six men in Trnovo. The men, three of whom were underage, were some of thousands of Bosnian Muslims that fell into the hands of Bosnian Serb troops, and that were executed in the days and weeks following July 11th. A member of the unit filmed the execution. Fragments of the video were first shown during the Slobodan Milosevic trial, and multiple times in the years after, in the courtrooms in The Hague and Belgrade. …
Duets, Not Solos: The Mclachlin Court's Co-Authorship
Legacy,
2018
University of Lethbridge
Duets, Not Solos: The Mclachlin Court's Co-Authorship Legacy, Peter Mccormick
Dalhousie Law Journal
This article explores the recentphenomenon of the formal co-authorship of Supreme Court decisions. It begins with a short history of the practice, primarily in the closing years of the Lamer Court but expanding steadily under McLachlin. A closer investigation reveals two critically important dimensions: first, the practice is skewed toward the Court's more important decisions (measured in terms of subject matter legal complexity, interveners, and subsequent citation); and second, its diffusion across the Court's membership refutes the possibility that it simply reinforces persisting cleavages. This new practice represents a more overtly collegial format directed to the Court's more significant decisions. …
Reconciling Brady And Pitchess: Association For Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs V. Superior Court, And The Future Of Brady Lists,
2018
University of San Diego
Reconciling Brady And Pitchess: Association For Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs V. Superior Court, And The Future Of Brady Lists, Ryan T. Cannon
San Diego Law Review
In 2014, the Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department (LASD) joined a growing number of law enforcement agencies utilizing “Brady lists”; a system by which prosecutorial agencies are notified of potential Brady/Giglio material in a police officer’s personnel file. These lists enable prosecutors to comply with their constitutional Brady disclosure obligations—to turn over all evidence material to guilt or punishment, including impeachment material. However, in 1978 California made the contents of police officer personnel files confidential with the passage of the Pitchess statutes. Since that time, California courts have wrestled with the extent of allowable disclosure under the Pitchess statutes, including …
After The Trump Era: A Constitutional Role Morality For Presidents And Members Of Congress,
2018
Texas A&M University School of Law
After The Trump Era: A Constitutional Role Morality For Presidents And Members Of Congress, Neil S. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
In the United States today, the behavior of the political branches is generally viewed as more damaging to the American constitutional system than is the behavior of the federal courts. Yet constitutional law scholarship continues to focus primarily on judges and judging. This Article suggests that such scholarship should develop for presidents and members of Congress what it has long advocated for judges: a role morality that imposes normative limits on the exercise of official discretion over and above strictly legal limits. The Article first grounds a role morality for federal elected officials in two purposes of the U.S. Constitution …
Towards More Intra-Asia Judicial Cooperation In The Constitutional Sphere,
2018
Singapore Management University
Towards More Intra-Asia Judicial Cooperation In The Constitutional Sphere, Maartje De Visser
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
On 14 August 2015, the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions unanimously agreed to welcome Myanmar’s Constitutional Tribunal and the constitutional chamber of the Supreme Court of Kyrgyzstan as new members.
The Federal Circuit's Summary Affirmance Habit,
2018
Brigham Young University Law School
The Federal Circuit's Summary Affirmance Habit, Andrew Hoffman
BYU Law Review
The Federal Circuit is certainly unique among the circuit courts of appeals. Its exclusive jurisdiction over patents places it in a powerful position. But with that power comes a responsibility to oversee the development of the law. And in the last decade, the court has fallen short of fulfilling this obligation—particularly with regard to clarifying provisions of the America Invents Act. The court has repeatedly disregarded important questions of law by use of Rule 36 summary affirmance. Though other courts of appeals regularly use summary disposition as a means of dealing with burgeoning dockets, the Federal Circuit uses summary affirmance …
Tensions Underlying The Indian Child Welfare Act: Tribal Jurisdiction Over Traditional State Court Family Law Matters,
2018
Brigham Young University Law School
Tensions Underlying The Indian Child Welfare Act: Tribal Jurisdiction Over Traditional State Court Family Law Matters, Elizabeth Maclachlan
BYU Law Review
State courts have historically exercised jurisdiction over family law cases. However, under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), Indian child custody and adoption cases have been taken out of state jurisdiction and placed with Indian tribal governments. State courts have pushed back against proper deference to ICWA and violate ICWA by misapplying its provisions and refusing to transfer custody and adoption cases to tribal courts. This Note analyzes the state-tribal tensions surrounding ICWA and argues that the primary reason for the lack of full state acceptance of ICWA is that, historically, states have had nearly total jurisdiction over family law …
