Judges Commons^™

Lifetime Tenure, Aging, And Cognitive Decline, David H. Churchwell

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

Aging is a fact of life. We all go through it, and we all experience it. But not all of us are federal judges, and not all of us hold positions of power for life. Aging impacts each of us differently, and there are good reasons to have experienced, elder individuals in roles that benefit from such experience, such as serving as a judge. However, age correlates with an increased prevalence of cognitive decline, and that correlation risks harming the judiciary’s legitimacy. This Article argues that constitutional incentives for federal judges permit lengthy judicial tenures, which increases the risk of …

The Empirical Double Standard: Opinion Surveys Across The Civil–Criminal Divide, Kay L. Levine, Bernard Chao

Faculty Articles

Across different legal domains, liability doctrines recognize the value of community input. But do courts truly listen to the community’s voice when deciding these sorts of cases? This study is the first to explore how courts treat community opinion survey evidence within both civil and criminal law. To that end, we comprehensively examine trademark, false advertising, patent, antitrust, obscenity, death penalty, and search cases.

Our research uncovers a significant asymmetry: Courts readily admit survey evidence in civil proceedings but systematically exclude it in criminal cases. This asymmetry does not appear to stem from structural differences between civil and criminal litigation …

Reconstituting A Constitution, And A Republic: The Architecture Of Authoritarian Rule, J. Maria Glover

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A constitution can be remade without tearing it down, or even changing a single word. It is done by law.

“The judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as Congress may establish,” whose “province and duty” it is to “say what the law is.” U.S. Const. Art. III §1; Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 (Cranch) 137 (1803). It is not the power to remake the Constitution that grants it.

The Supreme Court is turning the inherited powers that hold power to law into instruments of its own aggrandizement. It is taking authority from …

Creation And The Republican Revival, William M. Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Gordon Wood's classic book Creation of the American Republic has long influenced legal thought and originalist scholarship in particular. It played a central role in the Republican Revival movement, an effort by leading scholars such as Cass Sunstein and Frank Michelman to recover a progressive originalism at the same time as conservative originalism was starting to shape constitutional jurisprudence. But, while the Republican Revival nominally relied on Wood, it misread central elements of his book - his concept of virtue and his belief that republicanism had largely been displaced at the time of the drafting of the Constitution.

The time …

State V Mangru, 337 A.3d 1009 (R.I. 2025)., Stephen Olive

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Courtroom Presence In The Virtual Era, Jenia Iontcheva Turner

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Technological innovation has made virtual appearances by criminal defendants increasingly common. These appearances have advanced efficiency but also raised questions about the scope of both the right and the duty of defendants to be physically present in court. Should judges, for example, be allowed to hold virtual arraignments, even if a defendant wishes to appear in person? Can defendants opt for virtual appearances at will? While courts are beginning to address these questions, they have yet to develop a coherent framework to evaluate when virtual appearances are constitutional and appropriate. This Article seeks to contribute to this project by examining …

Statistical Analysis Of Evidence In Criminal Cases, Giuliana Leon Carrillo

Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports (ETD)

Ideally, the evaluation of relevant forensic evidence must corroborate the hypotheses that the prosecution and/or the defense holds regarding the commitment of a crime. Therefore, optimal forensic evidence would be the one that can be found all the time under the same circumstances, and cannot be found otherwise, making the forensic scientist able to evaluate this evidence given the hypotheses provided. Nevertheless, this is hard to find, as ideal evidence being only a concept.

In this project, the probabilistic interpretation of relevant forensic evidence investigated in criminal cases with the aid of Wigmore charts and Bayesian networks was proposed. Using …

Court Review: Journal Of The American Judges Association, Vol. 62, No. 1, Eve M. Brank, David J. Dreyer, Reba Ann Page, Ana Cienfuegos-Silvera

Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association

Contents

Creating “Buy-in” for Juvenile Restorative Justice Programs: Lessons from Nebraska’s Community Mediation Centers, Kristen M. Blankley, Lisa M. PytlikZillig, and Ashley M. Votruba

Consensus and Conflict Over Context: Select Criminal Law and Procedure Cases from the Supreme Court’s 2024-25 Term, Eve Brensike Primus and Elena Schultz

In the Shadow of Trauma: Opportunities and Obstacles of Restorative Justice with Young People Who Offend, William R. Wood

Restorative Transitional Justice: The Judicial Role in Colombia’s Peace Tribunal, Gabriel Rojas-Andrade

Editor’s Note: Restorative Justoce: Repairing Harm, Rebuilding Community, Eve Brank

Thoughts from Canada: Restorative Justice Through Prohibition on Arrest, Wayne K. Gorman …

Reining In State Judicial Conduct Commissions, Rebecca Frank Dallet

Marquette Law Review

There is a new threat to judicial independence: state judicial conduct commissions. These bodies are charged with holding judges accountable for violations of state ethics rules. But what was intended to be a shield for the public against judicial misconduct has instead been turned into a sword used against judges. As the judiciary has become more politicized, commissions are being overhauled to include more partisan political appointments. Unfounded complaints against judges are easy to file and to make public, despite confidentiality rules. And investigations of complaints may take many months, leaving judges in limbo as to what they can or …

What Makes Federal Circuit Opinions Influential?, Jason Reinecke

Marquette Law Review

This Article provides the results of an empirical study assessing the determinants of a patent opinion’s influence at the Federal Circuit. I draw on a novel, largely hand-coded dataset of nearly 2,700 decisions issued by the Federal Circuit over a period of more than seven years. I find that some judges are more likely than others to issue binding opinions favoring patent owners (and others favoring patent challengers). In addition, drawing on case citation counts, I find limited evidence that extremely pro-patentee panels tend to write slightly more influential pro-patentee precedential decisions. Perhaps most striking and surprising, however, is how …

Are Judges Influenced By Dollar Amounts? Evidence From Tax Law, Jonathan Farrar, Thomas Farrar, Harjot Mehmi

Dalhousie Law Journal

We investigate whether idiosyncratic features of numbers in dollar amounts unconsciously bias judges. If so, appellants’ likelihood of success could depend on the dollar amount under dispute. Specifically, we examine the following: whether the first digit in a dollar amount follows the frequency distribution predicted by Benford’s Law, and, accordingly, whether the likelihood of appellants’ success varies with the first digit of their disputed dollar amount; round number bias, which is the psychological tendency to prefer round numbers (ending in 0) over other numbers; and even-odd number bias, which is the psychological tendency to ascribe different characteristics to even numbers …

Immigration Adjudication, Judicial Review, And The Uneven Incorporation Of Administrative Law Norms, John Harland Giammatteo

Journal Articles

This article examines the interaction between immigration law and administrative law. Scholars and courts regularly treat immigration as outside of, or exceptional to, the normal operation of administrative law and its norms of judicial review. Yet in the past decade, the Roberts Court has radically reshaped administrative law. This broader administrative law project has largely emphasized the primacy of the federal courts and judicial review, enlarging the putative rights of regulated parties, at the cost of agency power. Within that project, immigration adjudication is a frequent conversation partner. Immigration adjudication is used to undermine the administrative state’s claim to policymaking …

Does Textualism Constrain Supreme Court Justices?, James J. Brudney, Lawrence Baum

Faculty Scholarship

A principal justification for textualism is the constraint hypothesis. Conservative Justices and leading textualist scholars contend that—in stark contrast to reliance on legislative history—focus on the ordinary meaning of enacted text leaves little room for the Justices to be policy-oriented or ideological in their interpretations. This Article represents the first systematic study probing the validity of the constraint hypothesis, one that employs both quantitative and qualitative analysis.

The Article examines the Justices’ reliance on interpretive resources in over 660 statutory decisions in the field of labor and employment, decided by the Burger Court, the Rehnquist Court, and the Roberts Court—during …

Should Judicial Opinions Be Read Like Statutes?, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

Should judicial opinions be interpreted with an eye to their purpose, context, or the intent of their authors, or should interpreters focus on the ordinary meaning of the text? Opinions present the same sorts of interpretive puzzles as other legal texts, and yet they have been omitted from the debates over interpretive methodology that dominate the fields of constitutional and statutory interpretation. The omission is no accident: the Supreme Court has stated repeatedly—and with increasing frequency in recent years—that judicial opinions are not to be read like statutes. Yet neither courts nor commentators have explained why the principles that ground …

Useful Noise: Understanding Dicta And Knowing What To Do With It, Len Niehoff, Tucker Gribble

Articles

Sometimes we approach the idea of obiter dictum as if it were Latin for “Here the court says something I wish it didn’t.” When a judicial opinion includes a statement that hurts our case, we labor to cast it as dicta and we give it the first name “mere.” If the opposing party quotes the statement, we huff about its irrelevance and dismissively proclaim that it can, indeed must, be ignored. We treat dicta as background noise, and we encourage the court to plug its ears and hum.

The Judicial Voice On The Courts Of Appeals, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

The judicial voice on an appellate court typically speaks in the collective, so when a judge chooses to go solo—either in a dissent or a concurrence—that act deserves a close look. Separate opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court are common because the Justices have strong incentives to articulate a distinctive personal jurisprudence. But lower court judges have always been more reluctant to write separately, and for good reason. The institutional design and longstanding practices of the U.S. courts of appeals are very different from the Supreme Court: Lower appellate court judges are bound by precedent in a different way, rarely …

Standard Textualism, James A. Macleod

Michigan Law Review

For as long as legal scholars have been writing about the rules-versus-standards distinction, textualism has been understood to produce characteristically rule-like law. This Article argues for the opposite view. Far from generating the “law of rules” that Scalia famously envisioned, the rule of modern textualism produces a law of standards—much more so than anybody, proponent of textualism or critic, appears to have recognized.

Two aspects of today’s textualism produce this result. The first is its emphasis on ordinary language and communication. Modern textualism typically produces standards because ordinary language and communication are typically standard-like. The second is modern textualism’s drive …

Beyond Bathrooms: The Far-Reaching Consequences Of Denying Gender Identity In Adams V. School Board Of St. Johns County, Jeffrey Sun, Regina Umpstead Pratel

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

INTRODUCTION: The transgender community continues to face discrimination in United States society, and legal protections are unlikely to change anytime soon. Understanding the broader context of these challenges helps explain why some instances of discrimination in public schools may be overlooked or even supported by public officials. An examination of recent judicial rulings concerning transgender students’ access to restrooms corresponding with their gender identity—situated within the broader convergence of national legal and social developments—provides critical insight into the structural barriers faced by transgender students within the educational system and transgender individuals in society at large. Significantly, the growing visibility of …

Forum Selling As A Threat To The Rule Of Law, Brian Iverson

FIU Law Review

Forum shopping has long been a feature of federal litigation, but recent years have brought a more troubling dynamic in which federal courts compete for cases by “forum selling.” Judges engage in forum selling by adopting plaintiff-friendly procedures, reliably issuing plaintiff-leaning decisions, and publicly soliciting certain types of cases. These practices transform localized procedural discretion into a structural risk for the federal judicial system.

This Article makes two novel contributions to the federal forum-selling literature. First, it expands the discussion beyond bankruptcy and patent practice to examine ideological influences. Drawing on empirical scholarship and illustrative judicial profiles, the Article identifies …

Standard Textualism, James A. Macleod

Articles

For as long as legal scholars have been writing about the rules-versus-standards distinction, textualism has been understood to produce characteristically rule-like law. This Article argues for the opposite view. Far from generating the “law of rules” that Scalia famously envisioned, the rule of modern textualism produces a law of standards—much more so than anybody, proponent of textualism or critic, appears to have recognized.

Two aspects of today’s textualism produce this result. The first is its emphasis on ordinary language and communication. Modern textualism typically produces standards because ordinary language and communication are typically standard-like. The second is modern textualism’s drive …