Jurisprudence Commons^™

War Courts: Fdr, National Security, And The War On Terrorism, Harvey Gee

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Lewd, Rude, Obscene, And… Violent? Analyzing Student Clothing Depicting Firearms Under The First Amendment’S Obscenity Test, Luke Gorman

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Today’s national news and social media have repeatedly exposed our school-age children to the effects of shootings occurring within their schools and communities. Each shooting brings with it commentary, sometimes from the students themselves. While in-school student speech is more limited than speech levied in the outside world, students do not shed their speech rights at the “schoolhouse gate.” As a result, courts have failed to outline a consistent approach for when a student will be punished for wearing a shirt depicting a firearm to school. This Comment addresses this delicate balance by proposing a consistent three-part test framed by …

Dobbs V. Brown, Benjamin H. Barton

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization1is the most important and impactful Supreme Court decision since at least Roe v. Wade, and potentially since Brown v. Board of Education. Past survey data show that most Americans can only name two Supreme Court opinions: Roe and Brown. Dobbs will surely join that list. This Article compares the history, drafting, and opinions of Dobbs and Brown to show what a missed opportunity Dobbs represents. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the opinion, it should be clear that Dobbs was one of those unique times (like that of Brown) where the Court …

Structural Originalism: A Second Amendment Case Study, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

“Originalism” is having a national moment, even if it is not entirely clear what the word means. What should we be originalist about? The leading academic approach asks us to parse the communicative content of text ratified in a very different linguistic culture; then construct a modern legal meaning consistent with our semantic speculations. Too often the result enforces policy judgments made in a radically different moral and technological world. This makes very little sense.

In this paper I recommend a more perspicuous and coherent use of constitutional history, which I call “structural originalism.” Rather than saddle ourselves with the …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Structuring The President’S Removal Power: An Agency-Specific Approach, Peter Margulies

American University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions have taken a broad view of the President’s power to remove executive branch officials. According to the Court, the President’s Article II obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” generally requires that the President have authority to remove officials at will. The Court has thus far declined to overrule Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision upholding “forcause” restrictions on removal for multi-member “quasi-judicial” bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Nonetheless, recent Court decisions have eroded the rationale in the earlier case, which has received additional attention because of efforts …

Fourth Amendment Hydraulics And Programmatic Surveillance, David C. Gray

American University Law Review

There is a hydraulic relationship between Fourth Amendment rights and remedies. When rights expand, remedies shrink, and vice versa. That makes good sense. At its heart, the Fourth Amendment requires striking a reasonable balance between the competing interests of citizens and their government. Expanding rights by, say, adopting a more expansive definition of “searches,” or applying the Fourth Amendment to a new category of government conduct, compromises government interests. When this happens, courts can, and should, bring things back into balance by adjusting remedies.

Sometimes the Court is cognizant of this hydraulic relationship. When the Court expanded Fourth Amendment rights …

Art. Iii-Gpt, Nick Mckinley

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

This article recommends the development and deployment of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) large language model (LLM) tool by and for the federal judiciary. LLMs are revolutionizing legal practice, and judges should accordingly be familiar and in regular practice with LLM technology. LLMs can greatly assist the courts by increasing operational efficiency and public access to justice. Particularly, LLMs can improve efficiency in legal research, legal writing, and administration. LLMs present limitations or potential problems in the form of prompt dependency and harmful bias, limitations of data in their training sets, privacy and confidentiality, and the production of false or fabricated …

Foreword, Jedediah Britton-Purdy, Justin Deystone

Publications

No abstract provided.

Court Review: Journal Of The American Judges Association, Vol. 61, No. 1, Eve M. Brank, David J. Dreyer, Reba Page

Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association

Contents

We Need Cvility Now More Than Ever, Benes Z. Aldana

Bias of Work-Related Psychological Claims, Melissa Lin Jones

An AI Primer for Judges, Joseph Regalia

Editor’s Note

President’s Column, Vincent L. Johnson

Thoughts from Canada: The Supreme Court of Canada Considers the Application of the Common Law “Exigent Circumstances” Doctrine to the Warrantless Searches of Electronic Devices, Wayne K. Gorman

Crossword: Four 38-acrosses, Victor Fleming

Court Review Author Submission Guidelines

The Resource Page

What Judges Can Do about Implicit Bias: Evidence-based Recommendations and Practices, Jerry Kang

Court Review: Journal Of The American Judges Association, Vol. 61, No. 2, Eve M. Brank, David J. Dreyer, Reba Ann Page, Jane Manning

Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association

Contents

Understanding GenAI What Courts Should Know, AI Rapid Response Team of the National Center for State Courts

Large Language Models, Newer, More Powerful Large Reasoning Models, and the Courts, Pablo Arredondo and Javed Qadrud-Din

Any Sufficiently Transparent Magic... Damien Patrick Williams

Principles and Practices for Using AI, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Evidentiary Issues Raised by Artificial Intelligence, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Bench Card: Acknowledged AI-Generated Evidence, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Bench Card: Evaluating Unacknowledged AI-Generated Evidence, Thomson Reuters Institute/National Center for State Courts

Want to Know More About AI? ABA …

Court Review: Journal Of The American Judges Association, Vol. 61, No. 3 & 4, Eve M. Brank, David J. Dreyer, Reba Ann Page

Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association

Contents

Civil Cases in the Supreme Court’s October Term 2024, Thomas M. Fisher

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

Yes, There’s a Public Trust Crisis but Your Daily Efforts Can Reverse It, Emily LaGratta and Tom R. Tyler

Was That Wrong? Spontaneity’s Role in Judicial Discipline Allegations, John W. Valente, Shawn C. Marsh, and Tahliah Ling

Correction: Large Language Models, Newer, More Powerful Large Reasoning Models, and the Courts

Editors' Note, Reba Ann Page and David J. Dreyer

Thoughts from Canada: The Supreme …

Why Did Prosecution Strengthen President Trump In The 2024 Election?, Steven Arrigg Koh

Faculty Scholarship

Why did criminal prosecution strengthen President Donald Trump's electoral prospects in the 2024 federal election? It was not supposed to be this way: after President Trump's 2024 New York state conviction, many speculated that President Trump's "felon" status would imperil his political career. In fact, the opposite occurred: federal and state criminal prosecutions reenergized President Trump's 2024 presidential candidacy. Contemporary criminal law theories-traditional individualist, expressivist, and critical-struggle to explain why. 

This Article advances a theory of criminal coalescence to explain why the Trump prosecutions led the former President to political victory. Criminal coalescence is the intensification of mass support for …

Pozen And The Puzzle Of Counterfactuals, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Constitution and the War on Drugs, David Pozen’s carefully researched and brilliantly argued book, is both illuminating and disturbing: illuminating because it unearths forgotten moments when judicially formulated constitutional doctrine that could have ended or sharply restricted the War on Drugs were well within the Overton Window, and disturbing because it surfaces hard questions about historical contingency and the scope of the change that might have occurred in a counterfactual world. In this review, the author argues that the failure to specify both the nature of the counterfactual and the breadth of the alternative possibility have confused discussions …

What Is Trump Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court held that a former President is entitled to an immunity in criminal cases in certain circumstances. The decision has been heavily criticized, with many commentators saying it places the President above the law. Exactly how it does so depends on what type of immunity a former President enjoys. Is the immunity enjoyed by former Presidents in criminal cases an immunity from the operation of the primary obligations imposed by the criminal laws in question? Or is it an immunity from being subjected to certain types of sanctions for having violated validly …

The Sovereignty Problem In Federal Indian Law, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

There is a sovereignty problem in federal Indian law-namely, that the federal government's sovereign defenses prevent tribal nations and individual Indian people from realizing justice in the courts. Often, compelling tribal and Indian claims go nowhere as the judiciary defers to the interests of the United States, even where Congress has expressly stated its support for tribal interests. Conversely, tribal judiciaries allow claims to proceed to the merits, invoking customary and traditional law to hold tribal governments accountable.

Sovereignty theory helps to explain why justice can be done in one court system but not another. But federal, state, and tribal …

Trauma-Informed Judicial Practice Meets Therapeutic Jurisprudence: Compassionate Written Judgments In Child Protection Cases, Shelley Kierstead

All Papers

Society has become acutely aware that trauma arises from many life events and manifests in a range of physical and psychological symptoms. The legal community is increasingly recognizing that clients living with trauma effects would be much better served with trauma-informed services. While much of the emerging literature in the legal field focuses on lawyers’ work, there is growing recognition that judges can also play a role in responding effectively to trauma.

In child protection cases, trauma frequently exists at different yet related levels – for the child who is the subject of protection proceedings, and for one or more …

Defining The Field Of Judicial Administration, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

This Keynote address, as part of a symposium on "Theorizing the Judicial Process," aims to make a case for the field of judicial administration and to define the field more generally. Specifically, it seeks to raise the organizing questions of the field and to note the kind of work--descriptive, empirical, and theoretical--that is needed to answer them. The hope is to map out a collective research agenda for courts scholars to pursue into the future for the benefit of the academy and judiciary, both.

The Employees’ Dilemma: Balancing Internal Reporting, Whistleblowing, And Insider Trading Risks, Geeyoung Min

Seattle University Law Review

The Essay examines how recent developments in insider trading regulations and whistleblower reward programs can lead to unintended and counterproductive results of discouraging employees from using internal reporting channels within corporate compliance programs. While the presence of a robust and well-functioning corporate compliance program is a critical factor both in mitigating the level of public enforcement actions against companies and in protecting corporate managers from liability in private litigation, these programs often provide little incentive for employees to report potential misconduct internally.

Corporate compliance programs are designed to promote the upward information flow within the company, which is essential for …

Understanding The Big Three’S Wavering Support Of Environmental And Social Shareholder Proposals, Jeff Schwartz, Jefferson Jensen

Seattle University Law Review

Because of their substantial equity portfolios, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street (the Big 3) are central players in corporate governance. It is, therefore, critical to understand how they vote. One puzzle is that their support for shareholder proposals on environmental and social matters appears to waiver. In 2020, for instance, BlackRock supported 11.1% of environmental proposals at S&P 500 firms. In 2021, it seemingly reversed course, supporting 55.2%. It then flipped again, supporting 32.1% in 2022. Such statistics suggest that the Big 3 are constantly changing their views on these topics. This Article seeks to better understand whether this is …