Law As Hidden Architecture: Law, Politics, And Implementation Of The Burnham Plan Of Chicago Since 1909, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 375 (2010),
2010
UIC School of Law
Law As Hidden Architecture: Law, Politics, And Implementation Of The Burnham Plan Of Chicago Since 1909, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 375 (2010), Richard J. Roddewig
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The International Criminal Court: From Rome To Kampala, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 515 (2010),
2010
UIC School of Law
The International Criminal Court: From Rome To Kampala, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 515 (2010), Philippe Kirsch
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judicial Decision-Making And Judicial Review: The State Of The Debate, Circa 2009,
2010
University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law
Judicial Decision-Making And Judicial Review: The State Of The Debate, Circa 2009, Charles D. Kelso, R. Randall Kelso
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introductory Note To The Supreme Court Of The United States: Noriega V. Pastrana,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
Introductory Note To The Supreme Court Of The United States: Noriega V. Pastrana, Kenneth Anderson
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
No abstract provided.
Defending The Majoritarian Court,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
Defending The Majoritarian Court, Amanda Frost
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
No abstract provided.
Countering The Majoritarian Difficulty,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
Countering The Majoritarian Difficulty, Amanda Frost
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
Most state court judges are elected to office, and thus must be attentive to voter preferences just like other elected officials. Critics of judicial elections fear that subjecting judges to majoritarian pressures jeopardizes the rights of disfavored groups and undermines the rule of law, and accordingly call for their abolition. The reality, however, is that judicial elections are firmly entrenched in thirty-eight states, and thus appear to be a permanent part of the legal landscape. This article suggests that the so-called “majoritarian difficulty” posed by elected judges can be tempered by regular interactions with appointed, life-tenured federal judges, who are …
The Merits Of ‘Merits’ Review: A Comparative Look At The Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
The Merits Of ‘Merits’ Review: A Comparative Look At The Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Jeffrey Lubbers, Michael Asimow
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
This article compares several systems of administrative adjudication. In the U.S., adjudication is typically performed by the same agency that makes and enforces the rules. However, in Australia, almost all administrative adjudication is performed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), a non-specialized adjudicating agency, and several other specialized tribunals that are independent of the enforcing agency. These tribunals (which evolved out of concerns about separation of powers) have achieved great legitimacy. In the U.K., recent legislation (the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act) merged numerous specialized tribunals into a single first-tier tribunal with much stronger guarantees of independence than previously existed. …
Significant Statistics: The Unwitting Policy Making Of Mathematically Ignorant Judges,
2010
University of Baltimore School of Law
Significant Statistics: The Unwitting Policy Making Of Mathematically Ignorant Judges, Michael I. Meyerson, William Meyerson
All Faculty Scholarship
This article will explore several areas in which judges, hampered by their mathematical ignorance, have permitted numerical analysis to subvert the goals of our legal system. In Part II, I will examine the perversion of the presumption of innocence in paternity cases, where courts make the counter-factual assumption that regardless of the evidence, prior to DNA testing, a suspect has a 50/50 chance of being the father. In Part III, I will explore the unnecessary injection of race into trials involving the statistics of DNA matching, even when race is entirely irrelevant to the particular case. Next, in Part IV, …
Slavery Jurisprudence On The Supreme Court Of North Carolina, 1828-1858: William Gaston And Thomas Ruffin,
2010
Campbell University School of Law
Slavery Jurisprudence On The Supreme Court Of North Carolina, 1828-1858: William Gaston And Thomas Ruffin, Timothy C. Meyer
Campbell Law Review
In the years preceding the Civil War, two North Carolina Supreme Court Justices, Chief Justice Thomas Ruffin and Associate Justice William Gaston, offered starkly different legal opinions on issues relating to slavery. Despite broad similarities in their backgrounds and their agreement on many other legal and judicial issues, Ruffin and Gaston approached slavery from sharply contrasting perspectives. Both men used their positions on the bench to influence the treatment and legal status of slaves. While Ruffin vigorously defended the peculiar institution and took the concept of chattel to a logical extreme, Gaston denounced many of its dehumanizing elements. In fact, …
Understanding Caperton: Judicial Disqualification Under The Due Process Clause,
2010
University of Maine School of Law
Understanding Caperton: Judicial Disqualification Under The Due Process Clause, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
It is virtually impossible to discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. without hearing some variant of the following response: “I can’t believe it was as close as it was.” And it does not matter whether you are chatting with your next-door neighbor who had never thought about judicial ethics in his life or discussing the case with a judicial-recusal expert. Nearly everyone seems to agree: Caperton was an “easy” case and that four justices dissented is an indication that there is something terribly wrong. Not only has Caperton elevated the issue of judicial impartiality …
Moral Foundation Theory And The Law,
2010
Seattle University School of Law
Moral Foundation Theory And The Law, Colin Prince
Seattle University Law Review
Moral foundation theory argues that there are five basic moral foundations: (1) harm/care, (2) fairness/reciprocity, (3) ingroup/loyalty, (4) authority/respect, and (5) purity/sanctity. These five foundations comprise the building blocks of morality, regardless of the culture. In other words, while every society constructs its own morality, it is the varying weights that each society allots to these five universal foundations that create the variety. Haidt likens moral foundation theory to an “audio equalizer,” with each culture adjusting the sliders differently. The researchers, however, were not content to simply categorize moral foundations—they have tied the foundations to political leanings. And it is …
A Call For Judicial Scrutiny: How Increased Judicial Discretion Has Led To Disparity And Unpredictability In Federal Sentencings For Child Pornography,
2010
Seattle University School of Law
A Call For Judicial Scrutiny: How Increased Judicial Discretion Has Led To Disparity And Unpredictability In Federal Sentencings For Child Pornography, Loren Rigsby
Seattle University Law Review
The United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) has made child pornography related crimes among the most harshly punishable federal offenses. Nevertheless, sentencing judges have regained the right to depart from the recommended Federal Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guideline range for child pornography reflects sound and clear congressional intent to impose harsh penalties on defendants to deter, and ultimately eliminate, the market for child pornography. For this reason, this Comment argues that sentences that fall outside the Guidelines range should be reviewed with much greater scrutiny and should not be used solely to reflect a judge’s view that the advised sentence is …
Limiting Article Iii Standing To "Accidental" Plaintiffs: Lessons From Environmental And Animal Law Cases,
2010
Pepperdine University School of Law
Limiting Article Iii Standing To "Accidental" Plaintiffs: Lessons From Environmental And Animal Law Cases, Robert J. Pushaw Jr.
Georgia Law Review
According to the Supreme Court, Article III's extension
of "judicialPower" to "Cases" and "Controversies"limits
standing to plaintiffs who can demonstrate an
individualized "injury in fact" that was caused by the
defendant and that is judicially redressable. Article III's
text and history, however, do not mention "injury,"
"causation,"or "redressability."
Furthermore, these standards are malleable and have
been applied to achieve ideological goals, especially in
cases involving environmental and animal-welfare laws.
Most notably, the Court has recognized an "injury in fact"
to one's aesthetic enjoyment of nature, but determining
such an injury is arbitrarybecause "aesthetics"is a matter
of personal taste. Judges have …
Judges And Their Editors,
2010
University of Missouri School of Law
Judges And Their Editors, Douglas E. Abrams
Faculty Publications
This essay discusses the roles of personal law clerks, central staff clerks, and Reporters of Decisions in editing judges’ opinions at the drafting stage. “The overarching lesson [is] that by submerging pride of authorship during an opinion’s gestation and by weighing editorial input with an open mind, judges secure in their craft advance the interests of justice.” The essay also discusses the constraints imposed by the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct on the circle of persons a judge may consult without giving the parties advance notice. The essay is adapted from Prof. Abrams’ address to the international meeting of …
Misplaced Modifiers - Say What,
2010
American University Washington College of Law
Misplaced Modifiers - Say What, David Spratt
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
No abstract provided.
The New Calculus Of Punitive Damages For Employment Discrimination Cases,
2010
University of Cincinnati - Main Campus
The New Calculus Of Punitive Damages For Employment Discrimination Cases, Sandra Sperino
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Error Correction,
2010
Marquette University Law School
Deliberation, Deference, And Discretion: Reflections On Decision Making At The Trial, Appellate, And Supreme Court,
2010
Illinois Supreme Court
Deliberation, Deference, And Discretion: Reflections On Decision Making At The Trial, Appellate, And Supreme Court, Rita B. Garman
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Judicial Independence And Accountability In An Age Of Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments,
2010
University of St. Thomas School of Law
Judicial Independence And Accountability In An Age Of Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments, Teresa Stanton Collett
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Improving Federal Judicial Selection,
2010
University of Richmond
Improving Federal Judicial Selection, Carl W. Tobias
Law Faculty Publications
Review of Benjamin Wittes, Confirmation Wars: Preserving Independent Courts in Angry Times (2006).
