Courts Commons^™

Defendant St. Isidore Of Seville Catholic Virtual School's Reply Brief In Support Of Motion To Dismiss, Michael H. Mcginley, Steven A. Engel, M. Scott Proctor, John A. Meiser, Michael R. Perri, Socorro Adams Dooley

Court Briefs

No. CV-2023-1857
OKPLAC, Inc. v. Statewide Virtual Charter School Board

From the Introduction

Plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss distills their challenge to the State's approval of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School to its essence: Plaintiffs believe that Oklahoma may never allow a religious organization to operate a charter school because (they contend) any faith-based school would violate the Charter Schools Act and the Oklahoma Constitution. Their other arguments-alleging technical errors in the State's decision to contract with St. Isidore and baseless speculation about how they predict the school might one day violate the law-grow from this …

Locke’S “Wild Indian” In United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Anthony W. Hobert Phd

American Indian Law Journal

This article explores the impact of John Locke’s Two Treatises on United States Indigenous property rights jurisprudence. After discussing Locke’s arguments, the article turns to the rationales of the first and last cases of the Marshall Trilogy—Johnson v. McIntosh (1823) and Worcester v. Georgia (1832)—arguing that, contrary to prevailing political theory, Marshall’s opinion for the Court in Johnson puts forth a fundamentally Lockean justification for the dispossession of Indigenous property. This article also provides a brief analysis of Marshall’s explicit Vattelian rationale in Worcester, commentary on recent developments regarding the precedents, and recommendations for reconciling them within contemporary …

Judges Should Be Discerning Consensus, Not Evaluating Scientific Expertise, David S. Caudill, Harry Collins, Robert Evans

University of Cincinnati Law Review

One of the most constructive critiques of the Daubert admissibility regime is Professor Edward Cheng’s recent proposal for a new Consensus Rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence. Rejecting the notion that judges and juries have the capacity to evaluate scientific expertise, Cheng’s proposal would eliminate Daubert hearings—and judicial gatekeeping concerning expert testimony—and require judges and juries, in their verdicts, to follow consensus in the relevant scientific community. Significantly, Cheng argues that judges and juries would have an easier time identifying consensus than they have in deciding between experts who disagree.

We find Cheng’s emphasis on consensus compelling, and …

Implied Consent In Administrative Adjudication, Grace Moore

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Article III of the Constitution mandates that judges exercising the federal judicial power receive life tenure and that their pay not be diminished. Nonetheless, certain forms of adjudication have always taken place outside of Article III—in state courts, military tribunals, territorial courts, and administrative tribunals. Administrative law judges, employed by various federal administrative agencies, decide thousands of cases each year. A vast majority of the cases they decide deal with public rights, which generally include claims involving federal statutory rights or cases in which the federal government is a party. With litigant consent, however, the Supreme Court has upheld administrative …

Self-Defense And Political Rage, Erin Sheley

Texas A&M Law Review

This Article considers how American political polarization and the substantive issues driving it raise unique challenges for adjudicating self-defense claims in contexts of political protest. We live in an age where roughly a quarter of the population believes it is at least sometimes justifiable to use violence in defense of political positions, making political partisans somewhat more likely to pose a genuine threat of bodily harm to opponents. Furthermore, the psychological literature shows that people are more likely to perceive threats from people with whom they politically disagree and that juries tend to evaluate reasonableness claims according to their own …

Equity's System Of Open-Ended Wrongs And Limited Remedies, Mark P. Gergen

Texas A&M Law Review

It is well-known that equity gives courts considerable discretion to override the normal operation of legal rules to prevent an injustice in a particular case. This Article shows equity combined this discretion with limited remedies (rescission, restitution, reformation, and estoppel), and that these limited remedies strike a balance between the value of doing justice in a particular case and the cost of destabilizing the law in a way that places a heavy thumb on the scale favoring stability over justice. Henry Smith has described equity as a “second-order safety valve.” Equity’s limited remedies make it a weak “second-order safety valve.” …

Resurrection, Bassim Al Shaker

Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés

No abstract provided.

American Legal Realism Today: An Idiosyncratic Restatement, Mark Tushnet

Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés

No abstract provided.

Foreword, Caroline Faye Radell, Udhanth Mallasani

Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés

No abstract provided.

Brief Of The Manhattan Institute And Notre Dame Education Law Project As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioners, Nicole Stelle Garnett, Ilya Shapiro, Tim Rosenberger

Court Briefs

No. 23-1084
Jill Hile v. Michigan

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

From the Background and Summary of Argument

Petitioners are members of Parent Advocates for Choice in Education Foundation (PACE), which seeks to protect and further educational rights. They contend that Art. VIII, § 2 of the Michigan constitution discriminates against religion. Accordingly, its enforcement would violate the Free Exercise Clause.

Decoding Dobbs: A Typology To Better Understand The Roberts Court's Jurisprudence, Katie Yoder

Honors Projects

The U.S. Supreme Court first recognized Substantive Due Process (“SDP”) in the early twentieth century. In Lochner v. New York, the Court established that there are certain unenumerated rights that are implied by the Fourteenth Amendment.Though SDP originated in a case about worker’s rights and liberties, it quickly became relevant to many cases surrounding personal intimate decisions involving health, safety, marriage, sexual activity, and reproduction.Over the past 60 years, the Court relied upon SDP to justify expanding a fundamental right to privacy, liberty, and the right to medical decision making. Specifically, the court applied these concepts to allow for freedoms …

Unintended Consequences: The New Test For Interlocutory Mandatory Injunctions, Jeff Berryman

Brooklyn Law Review

Interlocutory mandatory injunctions can be an important remedy during the pendency of a trial. With its decision in R. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp, the Supreme Court of Canada revised its test for an interlocutory mandatory injunction, holding that it should require a higher threshold and be therefore harder to obtain than an interlocutory prohibitive injunction. This higher threshold requires that the applicant demonstrate a strong prima facie case that it will succeed at trial based on law and evidence. This change adds uncertainty to the process, ultimately complicating and adding costs to litigation.

Nationwide Injunctions And The Administrative State, Russell L. Weaver

Brooklyn Law Review

Where an administrative regulation is deemed by a court to be illegal, unconstitutional, or otherwise invalid, courts sometimes issue nationwide injunctions. In other words, instead of holding that the regulation cannot be applied to the individuals before the court, the court prohibits the agency from applying the regulation anywhere in the country, including to others not before the court. This article explores the debate surrounding the appropriateness of nationwide injunctions. While at first glance such injunctions may seem to make sense, they can have serious consequences, including risk of abuse and forum shopping, amplification of erroneous decisions, and the negative …

Summary Eviction Proceedings As A Debt Collection Tool: How Landlords Use Serial Eviction Filings To Collect Rent, Grace Vetromile

Brooklyn Law Review

This note explores how landlords use housing court as a debt collection tool, impacting the rights of tenants and their ability to fairly adjudicate claims in summary eviction proceedings. Disparities in the number of evictions that are filed, as compared to evictions that are ultimately executed, indicate that landlords do not always use eviction proceedings to kick out a tenant, but rather as a method of debt collection. Using these proceedings in this manner affects a tenant’s ability to defend against eviction, even when the tenant has meritorious claims that their landlord did not provide a habitable apartment. This note …

Nonparty Litigation Holds: Clear To Implement. Complex To Lift., Alexis Bianco-Burrill

Brooklyn Law Review

Legal holds have long been used by parties, and nonparties alike, as a fundamental tool to preserve information that could be needed in litigation. There are a breadth of statutes, case law, and scholarly work clarifying when a party has the duty to preserve documents and therefore issues legal holds under federal law, as well as when nonparties share this same duty. Although the question of when to issue a legal hold has a clear answer, the problem of when a nonparty can lift a litigation hold is much more complex. Often, nonparties who have been requested to preserve documents …

Governance And Islam In East Africa: Muslims And The State In Kenya And Tanzania, Farouk Topan, Kai Kresse, Erin E. Stiles, Hassan Mwakimako

Exploring Muslim Contexts

Explores the relationship between Muslim communities and the State in East Africa in political, institutional and legal contexts

• Focuses on the relationship between Muslims and the State in Kenya and Tanzania
• Asks which factors, both within and outside the Muslim community, shape and affect this relationship in contemporary times
• Presents 13 case studies exploring governance issues within and across the categories of politics, institutions and law in Kenya and Tanzania
• Identifies cross-cutting issues of governance and Muslim communities which are relevant beyond East Africa

Recent studies of Muslims in Kenya and Tanzania have tended either to examine governance of Muslims …

Judges Should Be Discerning Consensus, Not Evaluating Scientific Expertise, David S. Caudill, Harry Collins, Robert Evans

Faculty Publications

One of the most constructive critiques of the Daubert admissibility regime is Professor Edward Cheng’s recent proposal for a new Consensus Rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence. Rejecting the notion that judges and juries have the capacity to evaluate scientific expertise, Cheng’s proposal would eliminate Daubert hearings—and judicial gatekeeping concerning expert testimony—and require judges and juries, in their verdicts, to follow consensus in the relevant scientific community. Significantly, Cheng argues that judges and juries would have an easier time identifying consensus than they have in deciding between experts who disagree.

We find Cheng’s emphasis on consensus compelling, and …

Amendment 80 And The Effects On Arkansas Supreme Court Elections, Sydney Kincaid

Political Science Undergraduate Honors Theses

In 2001, Amendment 80 was implemented into the Arkansas Constitution. One part of this Amendment was changing statewide judicial elections from being partisan to nonpartisan. This research project seeks to analyze the impact of Amendment 80 on Arkansas Supreme Court elections. The research considers how three components of elections have been impacted by the Amendment which are diversity of candidates, level of competition, and voter turnout. Data collection was conducted for all Arkansas Supreme Court elections from 2002-2022. The information that was collected includes election records as well as descriptive characteristics of candidates including race, gender, raw vote, opposed versus …

Letter Of Credit Related Trade Disputes - Court Decisions Legal Certainty In Indonesia, Rori Achir, Mella Ismellina Farma Rahayu, Ahmad Sudiro

Indonesia Law Review

This study examines the legal certainty surrounding commercial letters of credit (L/C) within the context of Indonesian judicial practice, focusing on how courts conduct hearings and render decisions in L/C-related trade disputes. The term “L/C” in this research encompasses both international L/C and the domestic equivalent, Surat Kredit Berdokumen Dalam Negeri (SKBDN). The analysis explores whether Indonesian courts have undertaken comprehensive judicial examinations across five key dimensions: (1) the determination of whether a breach of contract or a tort occurred; (2) the characterization of contractual relationships among the disputing parties; (3) the application of the L/C independence principle; (4) the …

A Qualitative Exploration Of Social Capital And Its Influence On Baccalaureate Degree Completion Of First-Generation African American Men At The University Of Louisville., Joseph Marshall Goodman Iii

Electronic Theses and Dissertations

This qualitative dissertation was designed to examine influences which various forms of social capital have on post-secondary degree attainment of first-generation individuals who self-identify as African American men. Additionally, the sample population consisted of Black men who successfully matriculated to earn baccalaureate credentials across differing academic disciplines at a public historically White institution located in the mid-south region of the United States. The research data was extracted from one-on-one, semi-structured interviews using authentic dialogue through open-ended questions. Theoretical paradigms of the study involved a phenomenological approach and an ontological philosophical assumption, integrated with critical theory, critical race theory and social …