Judgment And Opportunity: Decision Assignment On The
Mclachlin Court,
2015
University of Lethbridge
Judgment And Opportunity: Decision Assignment On The Mclachlin Court, Peter Mccormick
Dalhousie Law Journal
The workload of the Supreme Court of Canada is shared among the Court's nine members, but is this sharing equal with respect to the writing of judgments? A simple count does not provide an answer because not all cases are equally important. This paper develops an objective measure of case importance-the Legal Complexity Index-and applies it to the cases decided by the McLachlin Court. It demonstrates that judgment-delivery opportunities for significant cases have not been shared equally, either overall or with respect to any of the major subdivisions of the caseload. Some judges enjoy the spotlight, while others are relegated …
Judge Posner's Simple Law,
2015
University of Pennsylvania Law School
Judge Posner's Simple Law, Mitchell N. Berman
Michigan Law Review
The world is complex, Richard Posner observes in his most recent book, Reflections on Judging. It follows that, for judges to achieve “sensible” resolutions of real-world disputes—by which Judge Posner means “in a way that can be explained in ordinary language and justified as consistent with the expectations of normal people” (p. 354)—they must be able to navigate the world’s complexity successfully. To apply legal rules correctly and (where judicial lawmaking is called for) to formulate legal rules prudently, judges must understand the causal mechanisms and processes that undergird complex systems, and they must be able to draw sound factual …
Six Overrulings,
2015
Northwestern University School of Law
Six Overrulings, Andrew Koppelman
Michigan Law Review
John Paul Stevens, who retired in 2010 at the age of ninety after more than thirty-four years on the Supreme Court, has capped his astoundingly distinguished career by becoming an important public intellectual. He reviews books, gives high-profile interviews, wrote a memoir of the chief justices he has known, and has now written a second book. Six Amendments revisits half a dozen old, lost battles. Stevens appeals over the heads of his colleagues to a higher authority: the public. Now that he is off the Court, Stevens explains why six decisions in which he dissented should be overruled by constitutional …
Lessons Unlearned: The Effects Of Statutory Ambiguity And The Interpretative Uncertainty It Injects In The Courts,
2015
University of the District of Columbia School of Law
Lessons Unlearned: The Effects Of Statutory Ambiguity And The Interpretative Uncertainty It Injects In The Courts, Carolyn Singh
University of the District of Columbia Law Review
For centuries, courts have dealt with the challenge of imposing penalties for crimes when governing law changes. Applying the new provisions can be a straightforward exercise for courts, but when legislatures are ambiguous with regard to which law applies-forexample, to pending cases-the courts are forced to interpret what legislatures intended. For some judges, the answer is easily found in the plain meaning of the text. For others, legislative intent can become the deciding factor. Throughout United States history, this has been a manageable yet controversial task, but aside from interpretive differences among judges, creating laws with uncertainty is a dangerous …
Product Liability Law In Japan: An Introduction To A Developing Area Of Law,
2015
Continental Bank
Product Liability Law In Japan: An Introduction To A Developing Area Of Law, Younghee Jin Ottley, Bruce L. Ottley
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
When Rules Are Made To Be Broken,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
When Rules Are Made To Be Broken, Zev J. Eigen, David S. Sherwyn, Nicholas F. Menillo
Northwestern University Law Review
When do judges follow rules expected to produce unjust results, and when do they intentionally misapply such rules to avoid injustice? Judicial rule-breaking is commonly observed when national dignity and morality are at stake, such as abolitionist judges charged with applying federal fugitive slave laws, or when lives hang in the balance, such as applications of criminal sentencing rules. Much less is understood about judicial rule-breaking in quotidian civil litigation, in spite of the sizeable impact on litigants and potential litigants, as well as the frequency with which judges face such decisions. This Article is the first to theoretically assess …
Is There A Place For Religion In Judicial Decision-Making?,
2015
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Is There A Place For Religion In Judicial Decision-Making?, Hon. Kermit V. Lipez
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Philip D. Reed Lecture Series: Judicial Records Forum,
2015
Fordham Law School
The Philip D. Reed Lecture Series: Judicial Records Forum, Panel Discussion
Fordham Law Review
This Panel Discussion of the Judicial Records Forum was held on June 4, 2014, at Fordham University School of Law. The Judicial Records Forum focuses on issues involving the creation and management of judicial records and access to judicial records in the digital age.
The transcript of the Panel Discussion has been lightly edited and represents the panelists’ individual views only, and in no way reflects those of their affiliated firms, organizations, law schools, or the judiciary.
Contents,
2015
University of Richmond
When Judges Have Reasons Not To Give
Reasons: A Comparative Law Approach,
2015
University of Connecticut School of Law
When Judges Have Reasons Not To Give Reasons: A Comparative Law Approach, Mathilde Cohen
Washington and Lee Law Review
Influential theories of law have celebrated judicial reason-giving as furthering a host of democratic values, including judges’ accountability, citizens’ participation in djudication, and a more accurate and transparent decision-making process. This Article has two main purposes. First, it argues that although reason-giving is important, it is often in tension with other values of the judicial process, such as guidance, sincerity, and efficiency. Reason-giving must, therefore, be balanced against these competing values. In other words, judges sometimes have reasons not to give reasons. Second, contrary to common intuition, common law and civil law systems deal with this tension between reasons for …
A Friendly Amendment,
2015
Boston Univeristy School of Law
A Friendly Amendment, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
Heather Gerken comes to praise Justice Kennedy’s opinion for the Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor. 1 I come to praise Gerken’s valiant effort to recast the Windsor opinion along more convincing lines.2 Gerken does not propose a wholesale substitute for Justice Kennedy’s analysis. She suggests a shift in emphasis that lends Kennedy’s explanation for condemning DOMA a surprising jurisprudential significance. Where some us have seen yet another lamentable paean to the sovereignty of the states, Gerken detects the faint hint of the “nationalist” school of federalism that she and others have nurtured in recent years.3 Gerken does not …
Issue 3: Table Of Contents,
2015
University of Richmond
Chevron'S Legacy, Justice Scalia's Two Enigmatic Dissents, And His Return To The Fold In City Of Arlington, Tex. V. Fcc,
2015
The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
Chevron'S Legacy, Justice Scalia's Two Enigmatic Dissents, And His Return To The Fold In City Of Arlington, Tex. V. Fcc, Stephen J. Leacock
Catholic University Law Review
The creation by the judiciary of the doctrine of Chevron deference to administrative agencies’ determinations, followed by the judiciary’s application and supervision of the Chevron deference doctrine in Administrative Law continue. Protection by the judiciary of the evolution of the doctrine also continues as an integral component of the judiciary’s contribution to the central objective of the three coequal branches of government to achieve for the United States a more perfect union. However, synergistic cooperation between the three branches in order to achieve that central objective requires that each branch honor its own constitutional obligation under the United States Constitution …
In Search Of The Real Roberts Court,
2015
American University Washington College of Law
In Search Of The Real Roberts Court, Stephen Wermiel
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
No abstract provided.
The New Old Legal Realism,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
The New Old Legal Realism, Tracey E. George, Mitu Gulati, Ann C. Mcginley
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Diversifying The Federal Bench: Is Universal Legitimacy For The U.S. Justice System Possible?,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
Diversifying The Federal Bench: Is Universal Legitimacy For The U.S. Justice System Possible?, Nancy Scherer
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Realism About Judges,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
Realism About Judges, Richard A. Posner
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law And The Judicial Hierarchy,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law And The Judicial Hierarchy, Pauline T. Kim
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Chief Justice, The Appointment Of Inferior Officers, And The "Court Of Law" Requirement,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
The Chief Justice, The Appointment Of Inferior Officers, And The "Court Of Law" Requirement, James E. Pfander
Northwestern University Law Review
In addition to his judicial duties, the Chief Justice presides over a sprawling judicial bureaucracy. Each year, the Chief fills positions within that bureaucracy, designating Article III judges to various specialty courts and appointing such officers as the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Although critics worry that the Chief may use his appointment role to shape Third Branch policy unduly, scholars view the role as constitutionally benign. This Article questions the Chief’s role. The Constitution authorizes Congress to vest the appointment of inferior officers in the “courts of law” but not the Chief Justice. History teaches …
A Typology Of Judging Styles,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
A Typology Of Judging Styles, Corey Rayburn Yung
Northwestern University Law Review
This Article calls into question the fundamental premises of models of judicial decisionmaking utilized by legal and political science scholars. In the place of the predominant theories, I offer a new approach to understanding judicial behavior which recognizes judicial heterogeneity, multidimensional behavior, and interconnectedness among judges at different levels within the judiciary. The study utilizes a unique dataset of over 30,000 judicial votes from eleven courts of appeals in 2008, yielding statistically independent measures for judicial activism, ideology, independence, and partisanship. Based upon those four metrics, statistical cluster analysis is used to identify nine statistically distinct judging styles: Trailblazing, Consensus …
