Courts Commons^™

Do Bankruptcy Judges Belong In Chambers? Rethinking Inherent Civil Contempt Power In Bankruptcy, Abigail B. Willie

Faculty Articles

The bankruptcy court is the face of the federal judiciary to much of the American public. Almost as many cases are filed in bankruptcy courts every year as are filed in the federal district courts and circuit courts combined. And in each bankruptcy case, there are often dozens or more affected parties. As such, it is critical that the public has confidence in the role of the bankruptcy court and its judges. Yet, since the creation of the Bankruptcy Code in 1978, the non-Article III bankruptcy system has faced seemingly never-ending challenges to subject matter jurisdiction in the bankruptcy context …

Survivors Behind Bars: The Criminalization Of Abuse, Assault, And Human Trafficking Victims And The Need For A Trauma-Informed Approach, Jamie Beck, Chelsea Estes

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rise And [?] Of Anti-Administrativism, Gary Lawson

UF Law Faculty Publications

Scholars have proclaimed the administrative state to be "Under Siege" or subject to a "Never-Ending Assault." Was the election of President Donald Trump on November 5, 2024 the sixth, if not yet the seventh, day around the walls? 

This seems an appropriate time to consider the present and future of opposition to the administrative state – something that has come to be dubbed "anti-administrativism." The first task, as is usually the case when one seeks intellectual clarity, is to figure out what one is talking about. What is this "anti-administrativism"? Without knowing the answer to that seemingly simple question, one …

Life, The Universe, And The Judicial Power, Gary Lawson

UF Law Faculty Publications

In figuring out the role of the federal courts in the constitutional structure, the obvious place to start is with the Constitution. But what does the Constitution tell us about the federal courts and the judicial power vested in them?

Surprisingly little—perhaps even shockingly little—when one reflects on it. The “judicial Power” is one of the three governmental powers regarded by the founding generation as having “an unalterable foundation in nature.” The Constitution, however, does not define that power, instead taking for granted that everyone will simply know what “judicial Power” involves. History has proven that assumption to be false. …

The Elected Judge, Matthew Dale Kim

UF Law Faculty Publications

Many legal scholars and jurists oppose electing judges. Their core criticism against judicial elections is that elected judges are incentivized to avoid issuing unpopular, countermajoritarian decisions in constitutional law cases and thus fail to safeguard minority rights against abuses of the majority. Scholars have described this problem as the elected judges’ “majoritarian difficulty.” Numerous empirical studies suggest that elected judges do, in fact, fear electoral backlash and allow majoritarian demands to affect their decision-making.

This Article asks whether such fears are warranted. Elected judges should not allow majoritarian pressures to affect their decision-making unless the American public is aware of …

Section 4 -- Jury, Trial: A Misnomer In The Faa, Tracey B. Frisch

American University Business Law Review

The purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), according to the Supreme Court, was not merely to reverse judicial hostility towards arbitration by placing agreements to arbitrate on the same footing as other contracts but to actively promote the use of arbitration on a national scale. It is not surprising then that most provisions of the FAA envision limited court intervention into the arbitration process.

From Downes To Dobbs: Why Stare Decisis Should Not Stop The Court From Overturning The Territorial Incorporation Doctrine, Gino Piccinini

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

No abstract provided.

Do Federal Circuit Courts Of Appeal Provide Adequate Assistance To Self-Represented Litigants? A Review Of The Circuits’ Websites Resources, Jona Goldschmidt

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

No abstract provided.

May Federal Courts Answer Questions When Not Deciding Cases?, Benjamin B. Johnson

UF Law Faculty Publications

Conventional wisdom says that Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement prevents federal courts from answering legal questions when they are not deciding cases. This is only partially correct. This Article shows conditions under which a federal court may answer questions even when not deciding a case. To do so, it traces the appellate power back to its origins in English common law courts and through the early American judiciary. For centuries, common law judges have answered questions sent to them by lower courts when doing so would help those lower courts to decide pending cases. In England, the “case stated” procedure facilitated …

Guilty Pleas Matter: Waivers And The Forgotten Solemnity Of A Sacred Process, Julian A. Cook Iii

UF Law Faculty Publications

Approximately 98% of federal cases are resolved by means of a guilty plea. Thus, it is the guilty plea hearing, not the jury trial, that is the heart and lungs of our criminal justice system. Given the frequency of its use, coupled with the deeply impactful personal consequences that necessarily accompany a conviction, district courts play a critical evaluative and safeguarding function. As famously stated by the Supreme Court in Brady v. United States, the decision to plead guilty “is a grave and solemn act to be accepted only with care and discernment . . . .”

Guilty Pleas …

"Then What?": A Framework For Life Without Chevron, Gary Lawson

UF Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court overruled Chevron in Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Dep’t of Commerce. What happens next? What should happen next?

This essay does not try to answer either of those important questions. Rather, it seeks to provide a framework to promote careful thinking about those questions. Specifically, any predictive or prescriptive account of the law governing judicial review of federal agency legal interpretations needs to think carefully about four issues.

First, what does “deference” actually mean in any given context? “Deference” can mean anything from polite respect to absolute obeisance, and everything in …

Courting Bias: Effects Of Gender Socialization And Judges' Genders On Litigants And The Judiciary, Ellie Barmes

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

No abstract provided.

Crown Prosecutors And Government Lawyers: A Legal Ethics Analysis Of Under-Funding, Andrew Flavelle Martin

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Crown prosecutors and government lawyers are reliant on governments for their funding but exert no meaningful influence or control over such funding decisions. Nonetheless, this article demonstrates that as a question of law, under-funded Crown prosecutors and government lawyers risk violating their professional duties. If so, they must promptly inform the government, refuse new matters and, if necessary, withdraw from existing matters. If the government purports to block such refusal or withdrawal and does not provide adequate funding, resignation will become necessary. While law societies will likely not prioritize disciplinary action against such lawyers, the policy reasons to forego such …

The Sovereignty Problem In Federal Indian Law, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

There is a sovereignty problem in federal Indian law-namely, that the federal government's sovereign defenses prevent tribal nations and individual Indian people from realizing justice in the courts. Often, compelling tribal and Indian claims go nowhere as the judiciary defers to the interests of the United States, even where Congress has expressly stated its support for tribal interests. Conversely, tribal judiciaries allow claims to proceed to the merits, invoking customary and traditional law to hold tribal governments accountable.

Sovereignty theory helps to explain why justice can be done in one court system but not another. But federal, state, and tribal …

Judging Judiciaries: How Sticky Defaults, Status Quo Bias, And The Sovereign Prerogative Influence The Perceived Legitimacy Of The New International Commercial Courts, S. I. Strong

Faculty Articles

Forum shopping is routinely criticized as contrary to procedural justice. However, recent years have seen an increasing number of jurisdictions engaged in the process of forum selling, in which countries actively seek to bring lucrative litigation business to their national judicial systems. One of the most common types of forum selling involves the creation of new international commercial courts designed to increase a nation’s competitiveness in the global litigation market.

Most studies of the new international commercial courts have focused on how procedural innovations adopted by different courts are likely to affect party choice. While useful, these analyses assume that …

Expertise, Ideology, And Dissent, Paul R. Gugliuzza, Jonathan R. Nash, Jason Rantanen

Faculty Articles

Part I sketches a theory of dissent, explaining how voting and opinion-writing behavior on a multi-member court, such as a federal court of appeals, is a function of both a judge's preferences, as well as costs, including the relational disruption that comes from disagreeing with colleagues.

Part II provides background on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as well as a survey of prior studies of decision-making on the court and explanations of those studies' limitations.

Part III describes our methodology, including the novel dataset we built for the purpose of this study.

Part IV conducts a …

Automating International Human Rights Adjudication, Veronika Fikfak, Laurence R. Helfer

Faculty Scholarship

International human rights courts and treaty bodies are increasingly turning to automated decision-making (“ADM”) technologies to expedite and enhance their review of individual complaints. These tribunals have yet to consider many of the legal, normative, and practical issues raised by the use of different types of automation technologies for these purposes. This article offers a comprehensive and balanced assessment of the benefits and challenges of introducing ADM into international human rights adjudication. We argue in favor of using ADM to digitize documents and for internal case management purposes and to make straightforward recommendations regarding registration, inadmissibility, and the calculation of …

Judicial Reform From The Inside Out, Daniel Epps, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

The Judiciary Act of 1925, the subject of this Symposium, is known as “the Judges Bill” for a reason. The Justices of the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Taft in particular, produced the Act and persuaded Congress to enact it. To modern eyes, such efforts seem indecorous, perhaps even scandalous. But in fact, Supreme Court Justices and other federal judges have been extensively involved in judicial reform throughout American history. This Essay examines participation by federal judges in judicial reform efforts—what we call judicial reform from the inside out.

We survey examples of judges participating in reform debates from across …

Defining The Field Of Judicial Administration, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

This Keynote address, as part of a symposium on "Theorizing the Judicial Process," aims to make a case for the field of judicial administration and to define the field more generally. Specifically, it seeks to raise the organizing questions of the field and to note the kind of work--descriptive, empirical, and theoretical--that is needed to answer them. The hope is to map out a collective research agenda for courts scholars to pursue into the future for the benefit of the academy and judiciary, both.

Trauma-Informed Courts? How Judges May Influence Kids’ Experiences Of Court, Eva Mckinsey, Amelia Ashton Thorn, Minjee Kristin Kim, Catherine Gorey

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.