Judges Commons^™

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), Philippe Kirsch

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

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, 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, …

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, 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 …

Completing Caperton And Clarifying Common Sense Through Using The Right Standard For Constitutional Judicial Recusal, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

In Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a state supreme court decision in which a justice who had received $3 million in campaign support from a litigant cast the deciding vote to relieve the litigant of a $50 million liability. The Court reached this result, one I view as compelled by common sense, through a 5-4 vote, with the dissenters, led by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia, minimizing the danger of biased judging presented by the situation and questioning the practical feasibility of the Court's approach as well as the wisdom of …

Refocusing Away From Rules Reform And Devoting More Attention To The Deciders, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

The issue of judicial competence and integrity is particularly troubling in the wake of Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., where the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a state supreme court decision in which a justice—who had received at least $3 million in campaign support from a litigant—cast the deciding vote to relieve the litigant of a liability award of $50 million ($82 million with interest). The Court reached this result, one I view as compelled by common sense, through a 5-4 vote. The dissenters, led by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, minimized the danger of biased judging presented by …

Impeach Brent Benjamin Now!? Giving Adequate Attention To Failings Of Judicial Impartiality, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

In Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 129 S. Ct. 2252 (2009), the Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote vacated and remanded a decision of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals in which Justice Brent Benjamin cast the deciding vote in favor of Massey, a company run by Don Blankenship, who had provided $3 million in support to Benjamin during his 2004 election campaign.

Despite the unsavory taste of the entire episode, the Court was excessively careful not to criticize Justice Benjamin. Overlooked because of this undue judicial civility and controversy about the constitutional aspects of the decision …

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 …

The New Calculus Of Punitive Damages For Employment Discrimination Cases, Sandra Sperino

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Error Correction, Chad M. Oldfather

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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, Teresa Stanton Collett

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Clinton, Ginsburg, And Centrist Federalism, Russell A. Miller

Indiana Law Journal

This Article examines Justice Ginsburg's overlooked federalism jurisprudence and concludes that it almost perfectly complements President Bill Clinton's New Democratic centrism, especially his pro-state federalism agenda. The Article concludes that their nuanced, "centrist" approach to federalism has two characteristics. First,t hey value the states 'governing autonomy and show respect for the state agents that realize that autonomy. Second, they credit the states as intersubjective actors engaged in the pursuit of their interests, albeit in political processes usually carried out at the federal level.

Will The Real Elena Kagan Please Stand Up? Conflicting Public Images In The Supreme Court Confirmation Process, Keith J. Bybee

Institute for the Study of the Judiciary, Politics, and the Media at Syracuse University

What images of judging did the Kagan confirmation process project?

My response to this question begins with a brief overview of existing public perceptions of the Supreme Court. I argue that a large portion of the public sees the justices as impartial arbiters who can be trusted to rule fairly. At the same time, a large portion of the public also sees the justices as political actors who are wrapped up in partisan disputes. Given these prevailing public views, we should expect the Kagan confirmation process to transmit contradictory images of judicial decisionmaking, with a portrait of judging as a …

(Re) Constructing Judicial Ethics In Canada, Richard Devlin Frsc

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Any discussion of judicial ethics and accountability -- whether it is at the state, national, or international level-inevitably requires engagement with two key ideals: impartiality and independence. Ideals are important because they can provide a trajectory for human action. But ideals can also be a problem because their generality and abstraction can cause one to prevaricate -- or even pontificate -- when it comes to the immediate and the pragmatic Indeed, there are times when ideals such as impartiality and independence can become false gods insofar as they promise salvation but ultimately, deliver little. Consequently, when one is asked to …

Ivan Rand's Ancient Constitutionalism, Jonathon Penney

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Few names loom larger than Ivan Rand’s in the history of Canadian law. If anything, Rand has retained his image as a courageous judge willing to bend the law in creative ways to seek justice and protect the rights of oppressed minorities. But Rand’s legal ideas have not faired as well. Over the years, his theory of “implied rights,” and view of the judicial role, has been criticized as incoherent and indefensible. The central aim of this paper is to challenge these criticisms. I want to offer a solution by reconstructing an overlooked component of his legal thought: a form …

Watch Your Language: A Review Of The Use Of Stigmatizing Language By Canadian Judges, Jocelyn Downie, Michelle Black

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Despite ongoing advances in understanding the causes and prevalence of mental health issues, stigmatizing language is still often directed at people who have mental illness. Such language is regularly used by parties, such as the media, who have great influence on public opinion and attitudes. Since the decisions from Canadian courtrooms can also have a strong impact on societal views, we asked whether judges use stigmatizing language in their decisions. To answer this question, we conducted a qualitative study by searching through modern Canadian case law using search terms that were indicative of stigmatizing language. We found that, although judges …