Jurisprudence Commons^™

Punitive Damages Vs. The Death Penalty: In Search Of A Unified Approach To Jury Discretion And Due Process Of Law, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

The role of the jury in awarding monetary damages to plaintiffs in a wide range of civil cases has captured the attention of the media, contemporary non-fiction writers, and reform-minded politicians in recent years. Particular attention has been focused on huge jury awards, which has led many commentators to criticize the wisdom of permitting juries to move so much money from one place to another. Although the right to a jury trial, and with it the exercise of broad judicial discretion, is constitutionally based, many reform efforts have moved toward removing juries from cases both as to the subject matter …

Framing The Fourth, Tracey Maclin, Julia Mirabella

Michigan Law Review

Our knowledge of the Fourth Amendment's history was fundamentally transformed when William Cuddihy completed his Ph.D. dissertation in 1990. Cuddihy's study was the most comprehensive and detailed examination of the history of search and seizure law and essential reading for anyone interested in the amendment's history. At first, Cuddihy's work was little known: only a few people noticed when the highly regarded constitutional historian Leonard W. Levy stated that "Cuddihy is the best authority on the origins of the Fourth Amendment." Cuddihy finished his dissertation in 1990 and it remained unedited, unpublished, and largely unknown for several years-until Justice O'Connor …

Stop The Stop The Beach Plurality!, J. Peter Byrne

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The plurality opinion in Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection articulated a new doctrine of "judicial takings," and justified it with arguments drawing on text, history, precedent, and "common sense." This essay argues that the opinion falls makes a mockery of such forms of interpretation, represents raw pursuit of an ideological agenda, and indicates why the Regulatory Takings Doctrine more generally should be abandoned or limited.

The New Old Legal Realsim, Tracey E. George, Mitu Gulati, Ann C. Mcginley

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Judges produce opinions for numerous purposes. A judicial opinion decides a case and informs the parties whether they won or lost. But in a common law system, the most important purpose of the opinion, particularly the appellate opinion, is to educate prospective litigants, lawyers, and lower court judges about the law: what it is and how it applies to a specific set of facts. Without this purpose, courts could more quickly and efficiently issue one-sentence rulings rather than set forth reasons. By issuing opinions, courts give actors a means of evaluating whether their actions are within the bounds of law. …

Legal Positivism As An Idea About Morality, Martin J. Stone

Articles

I ask what a proper critical target for 'legal positivism' might be. I argue that utilitarian moral theory, and more generally fully directive moral theories, are unacknowledged motivations for legal positivism. Contemporary debate about 'the nature of law' is, historically speaking, much more of a footnote to utilitarianism than has been recognized.

Jurisprudence For A Digital Age: Free Software And The Need For A New Media Legal Authority, Nicholas Clark

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Conference Bibliography: Selected Books And Other Publications By Conference Participants And New Scholarly Books Related To Law And The Humanities, University Of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School Of Law

Association for the Study of Law, Culture, & the Humanities 14th Annual Conference

A selected bibliography was prepared in connection with the Association for the Study of Law, Culture and the Humanities 14th Annual Conference held at the William S. Boyd School of Law, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, on March 11-12, 2011.

Conference Program -- Association For The Study Of Law, Culture, & The Humanities 14th Annual Conference, University Of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School Of Law

Association for the Study of Law, Culture, & the Humanities 14th Annual Conference

The UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law hosted the Association for the Study of Law, Culture & the Humanities 14th Annual Conference from March 11-12, 2011. The Association brings together more than 275 interdisciplinary scholars from around the world each year to discuss law and legal issues from a broad perspective. Scholars attended the meeting at UNLV from Australia, Canada, England, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand and Sweden. The theme of the conference, drawing on the work of Nan Seuffert of the University of Waikato, was "Boundaries and Enemies."

The Association for the Study of Law, Culture and the Humanities …

Useless Property, Rashmi Dyal-Chand

Cardozo Law Review

In his exposition of an economic theory of property rights, Harold Demsetz reinforced a foundational assumption in property law: that private ownership is the best way to harness resources for wealth-building purposes. Implicit in Demsetz's model is the largely undefined belief that private ownership will incentivize appropriate use of the property because such use produces higher exchange value. This Article identifies a blind spot in Demsetz's theory that has largely escaped attention in property law and theory. While fully acknowledging the powerful connection between use and exchange value delineated by Demsetz, it argues that, in disparate markets for new or …

Acontextual Judicial Review, Louis Michael Seidman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Policy And Antisocial Testators, Ronald J. Scalise Jr.

Cardozo Law Review

This Article challenges the conventional wisdom that "deadhand" control by testators in certain situations is violative of public policy and should not be enforced. Specifically, it argues that many legacies conditioned on a beneficiary acting a certain way or doing a certain thing, such as not marrying or remarrying, should be enforced. This Article argues that the modern approach of disallowing conditions or restrictions on marital freedom in legacies is a product of a bygone era and that the reasons employed for invalidating such conditions are no longer sufficient justifications in the modern day for the current approach of courts. …

The Individual Mandate, Sovereignty, And The Ends Of Good Government: A Reply To Professor Randy Barnett, Patrick Mckinley Brennan

Working Paper Series

Randy Barnett has recently argued that the individual mandate is unconstitutional because it is an improper regulation under the Necessary and Proper Clause (in conjunction with the Commerce Clause) because it improperly "commandeers" the people and thereby violates their sovereignty. In this paper, I counter that the argument from sovereignty is unavailing because it is, among other defects, hopelessly ambiguous. The variety of historically attested meanings of "sovereignty" renders the concept useless for purposes of answering questions of comparative authority, including the authority of the Congress to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance from a private market. There is no …

Women And Jurisprudence, Ma. Elodia Robles Sotomayor

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Resolving The Qualified Immunity Dilemma: Constitutional Tort Claims For Nominal Damages, James E. Pfander

Faculty Working Papers

Scholars have criticized the Court's qualified immunity decision in Pearson v. Callahan on the ground that it may lead to stagnation in the judicial elaboration of constitutional norms. Under current law, officers sued in their personal capacity for constitutional torts enjoy qualified immunity from liability unless the plaintiff can persuade the court that the conduct in question violated clearly established law. Pearson permits the lower courts to dismiss on the basis of legal uncertainty; it no longer requires the courts to address the merits of the constitutional question. This essay suggests that constitutional tort claimants should be permitted to avoid …

Precedent And Justice, William D. Bader, David R. Cleveland

Law Faculty Publications

Precedent is the cornerstone of common law method. It is the core mechanism by which the common law reaches just outcomes. Through creation and application of precedent, common law seeks to produce justice. The appellate courts' practice of issuing unpublished, non-precedential opinions has generated considerable discussion about the value of precedent, but that debate has centered on pragmatic and formalistic values. This essay argues that the practice of issuing non-precedential opinions does more than offend constitutional dictates and present pragmatic problems to the appellate system; abandoning precedent undermines justice itself. Issuance of the vast majority of decisions as nonprecedential tears …

Beyond Experience: Getting Retributive Justice Right, Dan Markel, Chad Flanders, David C. Gray

Faculty Scholarship

How central should hedonic adaptation be to the establishment of sentencing policy? In earlier work, Professors Bronsteen, Buccafusco, and Masur (BBM) drew some normative significance from the psychological studies of adaptability for punishment policy. In particular, they argued that retributivists and utilitarians alike are obliged on pain of inconsistency to take account of the fact that most prisoners, most of the time, adapt to imprisonment in fairly short order, and therefore suffer much less than most of us would expect. They also argued that ex-prisoners don't adapt well upon re-entry to society and that social planners should consider their post-release …

The Jurisprudence Of Dignity, Leslie Meltzer Henry

Faculty Scholarship

Few words play a more central role in modern constitutional law without appearing in the Constitution than dignity. The term appears in nearly one thousand Supreme Court opinions, but despite its popularity, dignity is a concept in disarray. Its meaning and functions are commonly presupposed, but rarely articulated. The result is a cacophony of uses so confusing that some critics argue that word ought to be abandoned altogether.

This Article fills a void in the literature by offering the first empirical study of Supreme Court opinions that invoke dignity, and then proposing a typology of dignity based on a Wittgensteinian …

A Realist Defense Of The Alien Tort Statute, Robert Knowles

Law Faculty Publications

This Article offers a new justification for modern litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a provision from the 1789 Judiciary Act that permits victims of human rights violations anywhere in the world to sue tortfeasors in U.S. courts. The ATS, moribund for nearly 200 years, has recently emerged as an important but controversial tool for the enforcement of human rights norms. “Realist” critics contend that ATS litigation exasperates U.S. allies and rivals, weakens efforts to combat terrorism, and threatens U.S. sovereignty by importing into our jurisprudence undemocratic international law norms. Defenders of the statute, largely because they do not …

The Deep Seabed: The Laws Of Nature And Nature’S Manganese Nodules, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Defamation In Good Faith: An Argument For Restating The Defense Of Qualified Privilege, A.G. Harmon

Barry Law Review

Since the 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan, the standard for proving defamation has often proven insurmountable to public figure plaintiffs who claim their reputations have been hurt through libel or slander. But, the standard can prove equally insurmountable to “private figure” plaintiffs when a qualified, or “conditional,” privilege applies. Such privileges, intended to further the social policy of candor on certain proscribed occasions, can be claimed regarding otherwise questionable conversations as long as the dialogue is made: 1) in good faith; 2) about a subject in which the speaker has an interest or duty; 3) within …