Judges Commons^™

The Purpose Of The Preliminary Injunction, Samuel Bray

Journal Articles

This Article explores a reshaping of the preliminary injunction that is occurring in the federal courts. A preliminary injunction is designed to be a "hold in place" order, blocking actions by the parties that would undermine the efficacy of the court's remedial options. But the preliminary injunction is becoming a device for accelerating the merits decision. Instead of a four-factor test for preliminary relief, increasingly there is one factor: the merits. This Article critiques this transformation, and it argues that the preliminary injunction should be recentered on the protection of the court's remedial options.

Lessons Learned From The Trump Rule Of Law Stress Test: Beware Bad Faith Actors, Brian Z. Tamanaha

Scholarship@WashULaw

The second Trump Administration has engaged in a vast swath of actions that press against the outer boundaries of legality. These actions provide a unique opportunity to identify potential vulnerabilities and expose how the rule of law can be undermined. While I will elucidate well-known points along the way, my primary aim is to bring out aspects of the rule of law that usually go unnoticed or under the radar. After setting out basic aspects of the rule of law, I cover three topics: 1) adhering to the truth, 2) pretextual arguments, and 3) flooding the field with actions and …

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

Scholarship@WashULaw

Prepared for the Notre Dame Law Review’s Spring 2025 Federal Courts Symposium on the 100th Anniversary of the Judiciary Act of 1925.

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 …

When Hard Cases Make Bad Law: A Theory Of How Case Facts Affect Judge-Made Law, Sepehr Shahshahani

Scholarship@WashULaw

“Hard cases make bad law” is one of the most famous aphorisms in Anglo-American law. Its insight is that when strict application of a generally sound law would impose a special hardship on someone, a court may be tempted to distort the law to avoid the hardship. Scholars have long debated the meaning and truth of the aphorism, but the debate has suffered from an imprecise conceptualization of what makes a case “hard.” This lack of precision limits our ability to disentangle and work through the important questions the aphorism raises about how the facts of a particular case affect …

The Judicial Opinions Of Sandra Schultz Newman, Joel Fishman

Law Faculty Publications

Judge Of The Commonwealth Court Of Pennsylvania, 1993-1995.

Associate Justice Of The Supreme Court Of Pennsylvania, 1996-2006.

Presented In A Special Ceremony Of The Supreme Court Of Pennsylvania In Naming Its Courtroom In Philadelphia On September 9, 2025.

compiled by Joel Fishman, PH.D., M.L.S.

Alternate Approaches: Beyond Problem-Solving Courts, Erin R. Collins

Law Faculty Publications

Problem-solving courts were born out of a well-meaning experimentalist spirit, a spirit that is very much in line with the vision of a recent symposium on the multidoor criminal courthouse. These courts, which include drug courts, mental health courts, veterans courts, and many other specialized criminal courts, were created as a way to close one door to the criminal courthouse — the so-called “revolving door” that appeared to bring some people accused of crimes back into court as soon as they exited. Problem-solving court judges sought to open a different door for some of those who entered their courtrooms, one …

Precedential Trauma: Integrating Trauma-Informed Judging In Federal Courts Of Appeals Through Opinion Writing, Alison Brochu

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judge William E. Smith: Portrait Of A Jurist And Leader, Gregory W. Bowman

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Notice Pleading’S Quiet Return, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

Fifteen years ago, the Supreme Court announced two significant civil procedure decisions – Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009). Together, Iqbal and Twombly marked a new approach to pleading in federal courts. No longer would courts apply the forgiving notice pleading standard, in force since the 1938 adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In its place, the Court introduced plausibility pleading, inviting district courts to apply their “judicial experience and common sense” to decide whether a claim was “plausible.” Commentators expressed alarm, predicting that the new standard …

The Inadequacy Of Perpetuating Vestiges Of Segregation In K-12 Curriculum: The Justiciability Of Reviewing Duties To Adequacy In Florida's Education Clause, Soumya Sreerama

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Although the Supreme Court declared segregation the most abusive affront to education and ruled to eliminate vestiges of segregation “root and branch,” those same roots have grown unchecked to remain prominent today. One of the undercurrents of state-sponsored discrimination that has escaped desegregation remedies is the skewed, whitewashed curriculum that permeated K-12 classrooms in Jim Crow America. More troubling, is that those vestiges of an inadequately biased curriculum are still slithering in students’ courses today. Although student movements and education reformists have attempted to counter skewed curricula by supplementing them with separate ethnic studies courses, states like Florida recently passed …

Scientific Educations Among U.S. Judges, Christa J. Laser

American University Law Review

Should more judges have technical and scientific educations than are currently prevalent in the federal judiciary? This empirical study of the educational background of federal judges reports the undergraduate and graduate majors of active U.S. federal Article III judges. Information on the subject area of study is largely not publicly available, especially for judges appointed decades ago. This is the first and only publicly available research study of the subject areas of study of U.S. judges, collected via phone and email surveys to U.S. judges. The results of this study show that only 7.35% of federal judges have majors in …

The Paradox Of Continuing Risk, W. Jonathan Cardi, Ashton Jenne, Chance Villarreal

American University Law Review

The continuing-risk rule is ubiquitously cited by Restatements, casebooks, and treatises as a core duty rule in negligence cases. Indeed, as this Article reveals, the rule has been “adopted”—in the sense that at least one court in a jurisdiction has applied the rule, and no court has rejected it—in thirty-one jurisdictions. In addition to the breadth of its adoption, the continuing-risk rule is also far-reaching: it imposes an affirmative duty to warn, protect, or rescue another from a risk if the defendant’s conduct contributed to the initial creation of that risk. Because most negligence cases involve risk-creating conduct by the …

Electing The Supreme Court, Dmitry Bam

FIU Law Review

There is a curious irony in how we select United States Supreme Court justices. According to basic constitutional theory, as well as the arguments made by many leading Framers at the time of the Founding, one of the Court’s primary roles is to serve as a check on the executive and legislative branches when they exceed the constitutional limits imposed by the American people. Yet, we ask those very branches to jointly select the justices responsible for enforcing these limits, leaving the American people with only an indirect (if any) role in the process. Not surprisingly, the justices nominated by …

Administrative Law: Major Questions About Presidentialism, Jodi L. Short

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure: Cy Pres In Federal Securities Class Actions, Scott Dodson

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Environmental Law: Sackett And The Rules Of Statutory Misinterpretation, Dave Owen

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Health Law: Internet Prescription, Federalism, And The Opioid Crisis, Benjamin A. Barsky

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law: Felons, Firearms, And The “Federalization” Of Crime, Jonathan Abel

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure: The Culture Of Forum Shopping In Civil Litigation, Scott Dodson

The Judges' Book

No abstract provided.