Judges Commons^™

Muted Justice, Leah Litman

Articles

The Chief Justice of the United States possesses significant power. His position as the senior most Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court allows him to assign opinions to other Justices and to coordinate scheduling the Court’s cases for argument. And after Justice Kennedy retired in June 2018, Chief Justice Roberts was the median Justice on the Court, whose vote often determined the outcome in a case. Even after Justice Barrett’s confirmation changed that state of affairs, the Chief remains an important Justice to watch.

The Politics Of Lawyer Regulation: The Case Of Malpractice Insurance, Leslie C. Levin

Faculty Articles and Papers

This Article examines the politics of lawyer regulation and considers why some states will adopt lawyer regulation that protects the public, when others will not. It uses the debates over how to regulate uninsured lawyers as a lens through which to examine the question. Clients often cannot recover damages from uninsured lawyers who commit malpractice, even when those lawyers cause serious harm. Yet only two states require that lawyers carry malpractice insurance. This Article uses case studies to examine the ways in which six states recently have addressed the issue of uninsured lawyers to understand this regulatory failure. It uses …

Legal Interpretation, Mykaila Ashlynn Berry

Undergraduate Theses, Professional Papers, and Capstone Artifacts

The purpose of this project is to provide a fresh and in-depth analysis of legal jurisprudence through the use of two of the most important legal theorists of our time, H. L. A. Hart and Ronald Dworkin. This project focuses on how Dworkin’s position in his famous paper “Hard Cases”, helps us understand an important Supreme Court case, Cohen v. California. Cohen will be the main focus of my project. The project will discuss the case and the possible ways of deciding the case. Then the project explains both Dworkin’s and Hart’s positions. Finally, the project will analyze how Dworkin’s …

Popping The Question: What The Questionnaire For Federal Judicial Appointments Reveals About The Pursuit Of Justice, Diversity, And The Commitment To Transparency, Agathon Fric

Dalhousie Law Journal

Since 2017, the Canadian government has published excerpts from questionnaires that prospective judges completed as part of the judicial selection process, subjecting newly appointed superior and federal court judges to a degree of scrutiny that is unprecedented in Canadian history. Using this novel source material, this article explores what a sample of 16 judges’ questionnaires do and do not say about the individuals behind the robes. This review suggests that those appointed to the bench in 2017 generally demonstrate insight into the judicial role in Canada. However, some provide only superficial responses, others parrot back normative values that the government …

Against Executive-Controlled Administrative Law Judges, Stephanie N. Higginson

Harvey M. Applebaum ’59 Award

No abstract provided.

The Life And Legal Legacy Of Justice Steven L. Zinter, Neil Fulton

Faculty Publications

Justice Steven L. Zinter was a vital part of South Dakota's legal landscape for decades. As a private practitioner, circuit court judge, supreme court justice, and in other official capacities, he forged a powerful legacy in South Dakota. Over the course of his time he worked on cases large and small in many areas of law. He was recognized as a brilliant legal mind, precise writer, and careful thinker. It is a challenge to capture the breadth and depth of such a career. This article takes a look at his personal formation, his legal work in several settings, and how …

Departing From The Original Goals Of The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines: Drug Sentencing Disparities In The U.S. District Of Maryland, Jeremy Ritter-Wiseman

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

Restoring Stare Decisis In The Wake Of Janus V. Afscme, Council 31, James Tilghman

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Independence: Origins And Contemporary Challenges, David J. Barron

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Boldly Marching Through Closed Doors: The Experiences Of The Earliest Female Attorneys In Their Own Words, Nicole P. Dyszlewski

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

History Of The First Women Project, Nicole P. Dyszlewski

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Furman'S Legacy: New Challenges To The Overbreadth Of Capital Punishment, Jeffrey A. Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

A 2018 decision in the Arizona Supreme Court raised new strong claims that the death penalty in the U.S. has become a "fatal lottery," with critical implications for its constitutionality and its future in American criminal law. In the case, Hidalgo v. Arizona, the defense provided preliminary evidence that over the past twenty years, nearly 98% of all first- and second-degree murder defendants in Maricopa County-the state's largest county and location of the nation's fifth largest city-were death-eligible. The Arizona Supreme Court conceded this point even as it rejected Mr. Hidalgo's appeal. What the Arizona Supreme Court conceded, and what …

Conference On Best Practices For Managing Daubert Questions, Daniel J. Capra, David G. Campbell, Debra A. Livingston, James P. Bassett, Shelly Dick, Traci L. Lovitt, Thomas Marten, Kathryn N. Nester, Thomas D. Schroeder, Elizabeth J. Shapiro, Timothy Lau, Vince Chhabria, John Z. Lee, William H. Orrick Iii, Edmund A. Sargus Jr., Sarah A. Vance, Edward K. Cheng

Faculty Scholarship

This article is a transcript of the Philip D. Reed Lecture Series Conference on Best Practices for Managing Daubert Questions, held on October 25, 2019, at Vanderbilt Law School under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. The transcript 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.

Foreword, National Injunctions: What Does The Future Hold?, Suzette Malveaux

Publications

This Foreword is to the 27th Annual Ira C. Rothgerber Jr. Conference, National Injunctions: What Does the Future Hold?, which was hosted by The Byron R. White Center for the Study of American Constitutional Law at the University of Colorado Law School, on Apr. 5, 2019.

Coordinating Injunctions, Bert I. Huang

Faculty Scholarship

Consider this scenario: Two judges with parallel cases are each ready to issue an injunction. But their injunctions may clash, ordering incompatible actions by the defendant. Each judge has written an opinion justifying her own intended relief, but the need to avoid conflicting injunctions presses her to make a further choice – “Should I issue the injunction or should I stay it for now?” Each must make this decision in anticipation of what the other will do.

This Article analyzes such a judicial coordination problem, drawing on recent examples including the DACA cases and the “sanctuary cities” cases. It then …

How Circuits Can Fix Their Splits, Wyatt G. Sassman

Marquette Law Review

The desire to avoid conflicts between the regional circuits of the federal courts of appeals, commonly known as “circuit splits,” has had an immense influence on the structure and operation of the federal appellate courts for roughly a century. Over time, the Supreme Court has been assigned responsibility for resolving these conflicts. Yet as overall federal caseloads have increased, this reliance on the Supreme Court has imposed serious and well-recognized burdens on the operation of the federal courts. For decades scholars have debated bold proposals to address these problems, such as creating a new national court dedicated to resolving conflicts …

The Copyrightability Of Fictional Characters: Why Harry Potter, Arya Stark, And Matrim Cauthon Are Copyrightable, Justin Scharff

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Arguing The Algorithm: Pretrial Risk Assessment And The Zealous Defender, Julian Adler, Sarah Picard, Caitlin Flood

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This article examines the growing use of algorithmic pretrial risk assessment tools in the United States as a response to the systemic inequities of cash bail and mass incarceration. While proponents argue that these tools offer objective, data-driven alternatives to judicial discretion, critics highlight their potential to reinforce racial and economic disparities. Amid this contentious debate, the authors call attention to the underexplored role of public defenders in mitigating the harms—and maximizing the decarcerative potential—of risk assessment algorithms. Drawing on examples from New York and New Jersey, the article outlines four key strategies for defenders: demanding transparency in algorithm design, …

Washington’S Young Offenders: O’Dell Demands A Change To Sentencing Guidelines, Erika Vranizan

Seattle University Law Review

This Note argues that the O’Dell decision was a watershed moment for criminal justice reform. It argues that the reasoning in O’Dell should be seized upon by the legislature to take action to remediate instances in which defendants are legal adults but do not possess the cognitive characteristics of an adult sufficient to justify adult punishment. Given both the scientific impossibility of identifying a precise age at which characteristics of youthfulness end and adulthood begins and the Court’s repeated recognition that these very factors impact culpability, the current approach to sentencing young offenders aged eighteen to twenty-five as adults simply …

The Judicial Reforms Of 1937, Barry Cushman

Journal Articles

The literature on reform of the federal courts in 1937 understandably focuses on the history and consequences of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ill-fated proposal to increase the membership of the Supreme Court. A series of decisions declaring various components of the New Deal unconstitutional had persuaded Roosevelt and some of his advisors that the best way out of the impasse was to enlarge the number of justiceships and to appoint to the new positions jurists who would be “dependable” supporters of the Administration’s program. Yet Roosevelt and congressional Democrats also were deeply troubled by what they perceived as judicial obstruction …