Courts Commons^™

Introduction To Juries And Lay Participation: American Perspectives And Global Trends, Nancy S. Marder, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The jury in the United States is fraught with paradoxes. Even though the number of jury trials in the United States continues to decline, jury trials play a prominent role in American culture and continue to occupy headlines in newspapers and top stories on television. Americans might not always agree with the verdict that any given jury renders, but they continue to express their support for the jury system in poll after poll. This Symposium of the Chicago-Kent Law Review presents new theories and research, with a focus on the contemporary American jury. The Introduction begins by connecting discussions at …

The Desk. The Job. The Far Horizon, Nancy Bellhouse May

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Religious Freedom And (Other) Civil Liberties: Is There A Middle Ground?, Abner S. Greene

Faculty Scholarship

There appears to be an intractable debate between those who favor religious accommodations and those who favor civil liberties such as abortion rights and equality rights for same-sex couples. Many take firm positions of truth about one matter or the other. Here, I sketch a middle ground, continuing my endorsement of a robust normative or value pluralism. I canvass some arguments for this position, while also describing and critiquing some works of intellectual history that seem too wedded to one teleological posture or another. Despite my support for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, I critique the Court’s Hobby Lobby ruling, …

Legal Discourse And Racial Justice: The Urge To Cry ‘Bias!, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

One who is convinced that a judge wrongly decided a case may sometimes be tempted to accuse the judge of bias, referring to unconscious social-group stereotypes and/or cognitive biases that fall under the rubric of “implicit biases.” The rhetoric is problematic, however, for various reasons. One is that the term “bias” in this context may be misunderstood to mean something different and unintended – either a disqualifying bias under judicial conduct rules or a conscious prejudice. Another is that, even if the intended meaning is clear, a judge’s implicit biases cannot fairly be inferred from a single wrong decision. To …

Is Felony Murder The New Depraved Heart Murder: Considering The Appropriate Punishment For Drunken Drivers Who Kill, Dora W. Klein

Faculty Articles

In recognition of the increasing use of felony-murder statutes to prosecute drunken drivers who kill, this Article considers various criticisms and defenses of the felony-murder rule as they apply specifically to felony DWI cases. Part II of this Article discusses several recent precedent setting cases in which drunken drivers who killed were prosecuted under felony murder statutes. Part III explores whether such prosecutions are proper, given the existence of special narrower vehicular manslaughter provisions that a legislature might have intended to be the sole means of prosecuting drunk drivers who kill. Part IV discusses three particular limiting doctrines-merger, inherent dangerousness, …

Judicial Participation In Plea Bargaining: A Dispute Resolution Perspective, Rishi Batra

Faculty Articles

There is a common perception that judges do not or should not play a role in the criminal plea bargaining discussions between prosecutors and defense counsel. However, in many state jurisdictions, judicial participation is allowed or even encouraged by statute or by case law. This Article briefly summarizes some of the issues with the plea bargaining process, including how structural issues with the way defense counsel are appointed and compensated, along with the power of prosecutors, makes good representation for defendants less likely. By then performing a fifty-state survey of rules for judicial participation in plea bargaining, the Article explicates …

Substitute Arguments In Constitutional Law, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this article, I argue that that substitution is crucial to our practice of constitutional law. Of course, if one wished, one could easily extend the domain of substitution beyond these boundaries. Substitute arguments are an important aspect of law more generally and, indeed, of life. I have nonetheless chosen to limit my discussion to constitutional substitution because, I believe, overt discussion of substitution in this particular area illuminates important aspects of our constitutional regime-–aspects that substitution itself regularly obscures. To put my central point directly, I hope to show that constitutional law amounts to one, giant substitute argument.

Involved, Empowered And Inspired: How Mediating Halakhic Prenuptial Agreements Honors Jewish And American Law And Builds Happy Families, Lara Traum

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This Note discusses the pitfalls of existing halakhic prenuptial protocols and advances the use of mediation in the prenuptial drafting process. Section II of this Note provides a history of Jewish marital and divorce law, explaining the significance of halakhic legal documents and religious arbitration units. Section III examines the unresolved relationship between Jewish and American systems, discusses the advent of American prenuptial agreements, and highlights the shortcomings of existing prenuptial agreements in the Orthodox Jewish community. Section IV proposes that prenuptial mediation best honors halakha, American law, and individual interests.

"If You Is White, You's Alright....": Stories About Colorism In America, Kimberly Jade Norwood

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article examines the inefficiencies of Missouri municipal courts that came into sharp focus following the killing of Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. Norwood details and expands on her lone dissent in the Final Report of the Municipal Division Work Group—a group created by the Missouri Supreme Court to address the alleged abuses of black and poor residents in Missouri. Norwood argues for consolidating failing municipal courts to create larger, more functional, and just courts.

The Myth Of Obsolete Obscenity, Jennifer M. Kinsley

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Let’S Pretend That Federal Courts Aren’T Hostile To Discrimination Claims, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

Professor Sandra Sperino’s article, Let’s Pretend Discrimination Is a Tort,[1] makes a valuable contribution to the debate about the proper interpretation of Title VII and other employment discrimination laws in light of Supreme Court trends. Professor Sperino ably describes the way that the Supreme Court has used tort concepts increasingly in recent cases,[2] even having gone so far as to have called employment discrimination statutes federal torts.[3] This development has created significant concern among scholars,[4] including Professor Sperino herself.[5]

Rather than simply reiterate those concerns, however, in her article Professor Sperino adopts a novel approach: she takes the Court at …

Brief Of Federal Courts Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of The Petitioner, Willaim Araiza, Howard M. Wasserman, Lawrence Sager, Stephen I. Vladeck, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

When Disciplines Collide: Polygamy And The Social Sciences On Trial, Jodi Lazare

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article draws on the Supreme Court of British Columbia's Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada [the Polygamy Reference] as a concrete example of the benefits and limitations of intense judicial reliance on social science evidence in the adjudication of constitutional rights and freedoms at the trial level. By examining the evidence tendered, I suggest that the current adversarial model of adjudication is illsuited to combining the legal and the social scientific endeavours. The divergent values, methodologies and objectives of the legal and scientific enterprises severely limit the benefits that the former can yield, thus compromising …

Law As An Ally Or Enemy In The War On Cyberbullying: Exploring The Contested Terrain Of Privacy And Other Legal Concepts In The Age Of Technology And Social Media, A. Wayne Mackay

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article focuses on the role and limits of law as a response to cyberbullying. The problem of cyberbullying engages many of our most fundamental legal concepts and provides an interesting case study. Even when there is general agreement that the problem merits a legal response, there are significant debates about what that response should be. Which level and what branch of government can and should best respond? What is the most appropriate legal process for pursuing cyberbullies—traditional legal avenues or more creative restorative approaches? How should the rights and responsibilities of perpetrators, victims and even bystanders be balanced? Among …

The Procedural Aspect Of The Rule Of Law: India As A Case Study For Distinguishing Concept From Conception, Karina T. Hwang

CMC Senior Theses

In this thesis, the concept of the procedural aspect of the Rule of Law will be distinguished from what I argue are conceptions that are falsely promulgated as concept. The different aspects of the Rule of Law—form, substance, and procedure— are helpful in making the distinction between concept and conception. Examining procedure within the Rule of Law is particularly important, and I define a broader set of requirements of the concept of the procedural aspect of the Rule of Law. This concept is applied to understand the Indian conception of the Rule of Law, a particularly interesting case that brings …

Hryniak: Two Years Later: The Multiple Applications Of ‘That Summary Judgment Case’ From The Supreme Court Of Canada, Jessica Fullerton, Suzie Dunn

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In January 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Hryniak v Mauldin2 and called for a “culture shift” in the approach to summary judgment and the civil justice system more generally. With the ambitious goal of reducing protracted, costly litigation that undermines access to justice – all the while ensuring the fair and just adjudication of disputes – it is surprising that Hryniak has not garnered more attention.

Or has it? It has been nearly two years since the Supreme Court’s call for change was levied. Since that time, Hryniak has been cited more than 800 times …

Applications Of Neuroscience In Criminal Law: Legal And Methodological Issues, John B. Meixner Jr.

Scholarly Works

The use of neuroscience in criminal law applications is an increasingly discussed topic among legal and psychological scholars. Over the past 5 years, several prominent federal criminal cases have referenced neuroscience studies and made admissibility determinations regarding neuroscience evidence. Despite this growth, the field is exceptionally young, and no one knows for sure how significant of a contribution neuroscience will make to criminal law. This article focuses on three major subfields: (1) neuroscience-based credibility assessment, which seeks to detect lies or knowledge associated with a crime; (2) application of neuroscience to aid in assessments of brain capacity for culpability, especially …

Inferiority Complex: Should State Courts Follow Lower Federal Court Precedent On The Meaning Of Federal Law?, Amanda Frost

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The conventional wisdom is that state courts need not follow lower federal court precedent when interpreting federal law. Upon closer inspection, however, the question of how state courts should treat lower federal court precedent is not so clear. Although most state courts now take the conventional approach, a few contend that they are obligated to follow the lower federal courts, and two federal courts of appeals have declared that their decisions are binding on state courts. The Constitution’s text and structure send mixed messages about the relationship between state and lower federal courts, and the Supreme Court has never squarely …

Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Recusal Failure, Dmitry Bam

Faculty Publications

The American judiciary is suffering from a terrible affliction: biased judges. I am not talking about the subconscious or unconscious biases — stemming from different backgrounds, experiences, ideologies, etc. — that everyone, including judges, harbors. Rather, I am describing invidious, improper biases that lead judges to favor one litigant over another for reasons that almost everyone would agree should play no role in judicial decision-making: the desire to repay a debt of gratitude to those who helped the judge get elected and be reelected.

In this article, I argue that that recusal has failed to prevent biased judges from rendering …