Courts Commons^™

Politik Hukum Kedudukan Wakil Presiden Dalam Badan Pengarah Percepatan Pembangunan Otonomi Khusus Papua, Maleakhi Samuel Pasalli, Yamuna Nurafifah, Pranaldo Gunawan

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The legal policy regarding the amendment of Law Number 21 of 2001 into Law Number 2 of 2021 concerning Special Autonomy for Papua marks a paradigm shift from asymmetric decentralization towards controlled autonomy or leading to the centralization of power, notably through the establishment of the Steering Committee for Acceleration of Development of Special Autonomy for Papua (BP3OKP), which is chaired directly by the Vice President. This research is motivated by juridical issues wherein the Academic Paper (Naskah Akademik) of the amendment fails to provide scientific justification regarding the urgency of establishing this special body or the involvement of the …

Public Defender Discretion, Alma Magaña

Articles

A focus of criminal legal system reform efforts has been the curtailment of police, prosecutorial, and judicial discretion, which has been criticized for its arbitrariness and its contribution to racial, class, and gender disparities. However, one system actor has largely escaped similar scrutiny: public defenders, who, by grant of authority from ethical rules of practice and Supreme Court jurisprudence, have significant decision-making authority in the cases of indigent persons charged with crimes.

This Article will, for the first time, explore the historical rationale for giving public defenders the power to make life-altering decisions for their clients. Specifically, it dissects the …

Constitutional Obiter Dicta On Male-Male Sex And Fundamental Rights In Singapore, Benjamin Joshua Ong

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The Singapore Court of Appeal held a law prohibiting male–male sexual intercourse (s 377A of the Penal Code) unenforceable on non-rights-based grounds. The court's remarks about the rights to life and liberty (including whether sexual orientation is mutable), freedom of expression, and equality are obiter. But they are significant, since in Singapore, there are few constitutional rights cases and the courts focus on spelling out the limits to executive and legislative power without necessarily striking down exercises of such power on rights grounds. Indeed, the obiter dicta prompted the Legislature to repeal s 377A. Given the repeal, the obiter dicta …

Freedom Clinic Faculty And Students Win Clemency Case Through New Jersey Second Chance Initiative, Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law

Cardozo Law News Archive

The Perlmutter Center for Legal Justice at Cardozo Law secured clemency for LaShawn Fitch through New Jersey's Second Chance Initiative. Cardozo Freedom Clinic faculty and students helped prepare Mr. Fitch's clemency petition, highlighting issues surrounding felony-murder sentencing, the trial penalty, and juvenile justice.

The Use Of Less-Lethal Force By Law Enforcement: A Legal Analysis Of Civil Liability Cases In The Use Of Bean Bags And Rubber Bullets In Policing, Kenneth Lomenzo, Joshua Rosenbaum, Nathan Cronin, Mason Meyers, Akramul Hasan

Journal of Criminal Justice and Law

The use of less-lethal weapons such as bean bag rounds and rubber bullets has become a prominent and controversial mark of contemporary policing. Although these munitions are designed to incapacitate without resorting to deadly force, their deployment has resulted in serious injuries, fatalities, and a growing body of litigation. This article examines how federal appellate courts have addressed such cases through a systematic legal content analysis of 16 decisions issued between 1999 and 2025. Each case involved a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The analysis considers judicial reasoning, liability outcomes, …

The Fearless Decision And The Future Of Race-Conscious Charities, Chenglin Liu

Cleveland State Law Review

Historically, courts tended to differentiate between invidious discrimination against racial minorities and benign discrimination against whites in the context of affirmative action movements. With the social movements galvanized by the conservatives and the change of composition of the Supreme Courts and lower courts, the feasibility of race-conscious measures aimed at helping minorities is substantially reduced. The conservatives’ win in Fearless, coupled with the Trump Administration’s attacks on DEI, have produced a self-censoring effect on charitable organizations. Because of these threats, race-conscious charities will have to modify their practices to become more “inclusive” or face legal challenges from conservatives.

"There Was Such An Array Of Circumstances Pointing To Defendant's Guilt…": Shepard V. United States And The Dying Declaration As A Legal, Social, And Political History Of People, Places, Times… And Utility, Joshua E. Kastenberg

Cleveland State Law Review

In 1933, the Court, in Shepard v. United States, limited the “dying declaration” exception to the prohibition against hearsay. Shepard has been cited over 500 times by courts of appeal, the decision appears in evidence casebooks, and scholars have challenged it as robbing the voice of victims. However, there has never been a legal history of the decision. The case arose from a criminal conviction that occurred in the last days of the “Roaring Twenties,” and the appeal transited through the courts in the first years of the Great Depression. The Court, in a unanimous decision authored by Justice …

Request For An Advisory Opinion By The State Of Guatemala On Democracy And Its Protection Under The Inter-American Human Rights System: Expert Opinion, Notre Dame Law School Global Human Rights Clinic, Notre Dame Reparations Design And Compliance Lab, Diane A. Desierto, Francisco J. Urbina, Paolo G. Carozza, Anibal Perez-Liñan, Faisal Yamil Meneses, Nicolas Buitrago Rey, Ian Sheppard, Michelle Vasquez, Nick Polk, Carlos Chinchilla Mourra, Jose Cardona Sanchez, Pablo Proaño, Roselis Diaz De Freitas, Zolile Shude, Christian Mikala-Ofori, Rachel Cooper

Court Briefs

From Page 1

Notre Dame Law School Global Human Rights Clinic (NDLS GHRC) In collaboration with Notre Dame Reparations Design and Compliance Lab (ND Reparations Lab)

The undersigned Professors, staff lawyers, and researchers of the NDLS GHRC and the ND Reparations Lab respectfully submit this Expert Opinion for this Honorable Court’s consideration. 

1. The State of Guatemala has requested this Honorable Court to interpret specific provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights (e.g., Preamble first paragraph, Article 1 obligation to respect rights, Article 5 right to humane treatment, Article 8 right to a fair trial, Article 9 freedom from ex …

First Amendment Exceptions To Otherwise Valid Laws: A Doctrinal And Meta-Doctrinal Perspective, Richard H. Fallon Jr.

Northwestern University Law Review

When do the First Amendment’s Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses require exceptions to generally valid laws? Recently, the Supreme Court has upheld a number of such exceptions, which excuse some speakers and religiously motivated actors from legal duties that apply to others, including in prominent cases under antidiscrimination statutes and emergency pandemic regulations. By contrast, other landmark cases––such as United States v. O’Brien and Employment Division v. Smith—insist that First Amendment exceptions should be rare.

In analyzing the fraught and confusing issues that surround First Amendment exceptions, this Article makes four main contributions. First, it conceptualizes claims to …

Preventive Transparency In Third-Party Litigation Funding, Seth Katsuya Endo

Northwestern University Law Review

For years, efforts to comprehensively regulate third-party litigation funding have been unsuccessful. But bills requiring mandatory disclosure are being introduced in Congress, and the Advisory Committee for Civil Rules has finally agreed to take up the issue. By grounding the discussion of third-party litigation funding in both the broader civil procedure and professional responsibility scholarship, this Article identifies an easy, uncontroversial reform to preventively address the categorical concerns raised by the practice. The primary contribution is a doctrinal intervention, identifying how legal ethics are an integral part of federal civil procedure and then drawing out the implications for third-party litigation …

Nonparty Protective Relief In The Early Republic: Judicial Power To Annul Letters Patent, James E. Pfander, Mary E. Zakowski

Northwestern University Law Review

Much of the debate over the constitutionality of universal or nonparty protective relief in the federal court system has focused on lessons drawn from historical practice. But with its emphasis on injunctive relief, the literature has largely ignored forms of adjudication that arose outside the courts of equity and led to judgments and decrees affecting the rights of nonparties. As a result, the story of nonparty protective relief has not yet been fully told.

This Article offers a more complete story, highlighting proceedings in which federal courts issued judgments that settled a matter once and for all. Some familiar examples …

Control As A Constitutional Threshold: Moody V. Netchoice And The Case For Human Authorship, Giselle Goad

Northwestern University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC left a critical question unanswered: when do algorithmic outputs on social media platforms, such as recommended posts and videos, constitute the platform’s protected speech under the First Amendment? This Note contends that courts and litigants should borrow from the First Amendment’s speech-promoting partner, copyright law, and its authorship framework when answering that question. Copyright doctrine has already begun to grapple with how much human control is required over expressive outputs generated with the aid of technology, including AI, in order for an author to receive copyright protection over those outputs. …

The Search Of A Search: Moderating Reverse Internet Keyword Warrants, Tui Rademaker

Northwestern University Law Review

Statistics show that Americans consistently turn to Google and other search engines to answer their most personal and private concerns, yet a new investigative tool risks law enforcement having vast discretion in the access of this data. With a keyword warrant, law enforcement can request from a search engine provider (usually Google) a list of probative search queries that users made over a specified time period. Such warrants are beginning to face legal challenges, and so far, courts seem reluctant to recognize the constitutional implications—instead leaving law enforcement with greater potential discretion over their use.

This Note assesses the constitutionality …

Malapportionment: A Murder Mystery, Daniel Wodak

Northwestern University Law Review

Malapportionment—electoral districts with divergent ratios of people to representation—was ruled to be unconstitutional in a widely venerated series of cases before the Warren Court. Those cases held that a principle of political equality, one person, one vote, is required by the Constitution. But what is the content of that principle? Many Justices and commentators declare that it is vague, empty, circular, or meaningless. This creates a murder mystery. Malapportionment was killed, but by what exactly? This Article seeks an answer by focusing on the Supreme Court’s commitments about the scope and strictness of one person, one vote: it …

Trump V. Slaughter: Brief Of Independent Agency Board Members And Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Samuel Bagenstos

Appellate Briefs

Amici are removed board members from independent federal agencies and scholars whose work includes the study of independent agencies and the separation of powers between the President and Congress. Amici advance the view that there are federal agencies whose responsibility for protecting the safety and stability of the national infrastructure or ensuring the structural integrity of government necessitates their independence. Significant negative consequences would likely follow if these agencies were to lose their independence and their work were to become politicized.

Investigating The Relationship Between Noun Classes And Plant Folk Taxonomy In Chasu Language Of Kilimanjaro Region In Tanzania, Peter Rabson Mziray

Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences

The current study investigates the relationship between noun classes and plant folk taxonomy in Chasu (G 22). The study focuses on two objectives: the first objective is to describe the plant folk taxonomy in Chasu and the second objective is to determine the relationship between noun classes and plant folk taxonomy in Chasu. Data were collected from rural villages in Same and Mwanga districts by using free listing, field interviews (jungle-walk-and-identify), and written texts containing Chasu plant names. The findings reveal that Chasu folk taxonomy reflects different ethnobotanical categories; including a unique beginner which is mmea/mimea ‘plant(s)’, and three life …

Thermtron: The Unsexy Case The Current Court Should Overturn (Statutory Stare Decisis Be Damned), Christine Tamer

Texas A&M Law Review

Since 1887, Congress has created an impenetrable dike wall to stop appellate review of remand orders in 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), which provides: “An order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise . . . .” Then, in 1976, the Supreme Court held “that § 1447(d) does not mean what it says” and, thereby, punctured not a tiny hole, but a big one in Congress’s dike wall that had been impenetrable for nearly 90 years. While you won’t find Thermtron—an unsexy jurisdictional case—on any list of the …

The Progression Of Deinstitutionalization And Its Effects On The American South: A Judicial Analysis Of 20th-Century United States Supreme Court Decisions, Eva-Marie V. Jones

Honors College Theses

This thesis explores the effects of four landmark Supreme Court cases on the deinstitutionalization movement in the American south. Previous literature frequently discusses the legislative implications of this era; however, no law is applicable without the interpretation and application of the judiciary, which so often contextualizes the greater public perspective. Rarely has an analysis of judicial decisions involving psychiatric care merged with regional focus, and certainly not in a format accessible to the average individual.

From unmarked graves to abandoned infrastructure, the legacy of historic psychiatric care in the United States has been largely obscured – yet its consequences continue …

Chimeric Contacts And Consent: The Ill-Reasoned Expansion Of Corporate Jurisdictional Exposure, James Paul George

Faculty Scholarship

Two recent Supreme Court decisions have imposed aspects of general jurisdiction in a way that exposes corporations and possibly other legal actors to litigation in spuriously connected forums. One case-Ford Motor Company v. Montana-reached a fair result but with strained reasoning that will support unfair results. The second case-Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railroad Company-was wrong on the facts and the law, imposing general jurisdiction based on a vaguely worded corporate registration statute validated by a more than century-old precedent based on Pennoyer v. Neff's limited territorial model. Both decisions were the result of conceptual corners the Supreme Court has created …

Defining “Cases” Or “Controversies”: A Fundamental Confusion In Article Iii Standing Doctrine And Its Consequences In Multi-Plaintiff Litigation, Dominic Signa

Fordham Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has addressed the absolute core requirements of standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution on several occasions. However, the Court has not clearly articulated what purpose standing serves relative to Article III’s limitations on the exercise of judicial power to only “cases” or “controversies,” and this has led to major downstream effects in the realm of multi plaintiff litigation. Specifically, the Court has not explained whether standing is meant to ensure (1) that all potential plaintiffs demonstrate that they are properly parties to the same case or controversy before a federal court or (2) …