DOCSLIB.ORG

Edward Leavy: an Oral History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Edward Leavy: An Oral History i ii Edward Leavy An Oral History FOREWORD BY JUDGE OWEN PANNER US District Court of Oregon Historical Society Oral History Project Portland, Oregon iii Copyright © 2013 United States District Court of Oregon Historical Society Printed in the United States of America PROJECT STAFF Janice Dilg, Editor & Production Manager Clark Hansen, Interviewer Marie Bagwell, Transcriber Adair Law, Auditor iv CONTENTS Foreword..................................................................................................................vi Introduction..........................................................................................................viii Tape One, March 2, 2004........................................................................................1 Side 1 — Family History; Hop Farming; Elementary and High School Side 2 — Elementary and High School, cont.; University of Portland; Role of Religion in Law; Miranda Decision Tape Two, March 2, 2004......................................................................................15 Side 1 — Miranda Decision, cont.; Influential Professors & Courses; Moral- ity & the Legal System Side 2 — Sentencing Guidelines & Reform; Notre Dame Law School; Early Legal Career; Family’s Political Views Tape Three, March 9, 2004...................................................................................31 Side 1— Butteville Grade School; Parochial Schools; Judges and Controversy; District Judge Appointment; Qualities of Good Trial Lawyers Side 2— Public Understanding of Judicial Process; Punitive Damages; Judi- cial Activism; Campaigning for Judge Tape Four, March 9, 2004.....................................................................................46 Side 1— Campaigning for Judge, cont.; Bar Polls; Effective Trial Lawyers; Judge’s Role in Sentencing; Good Oral Arguments Side 2—Venn v. Reid Tape Five, March 9, 2004......................................................................................60 Side 1 — Venn v. Reid, cont.; Lane County Circuit Court Campaign; Orlando Hollis; Hans Linde; Varied Backgrounds of Judges Side 2 — Personal Backgrounds & Court Opinions; Pretrial Preparation; Jury Competency; Competency of Legal Counsel; National College of State Trial Judges; Federal Rulings in State Courts Tape Six, March 16, 2004......................................................................................75 Side 1 — Judicial Colleagues; Retired Judges as Mediators; Need for More Trials; Judges with Trial Experience; Otto Skopil & Court Reforms Side 2 — Oregon Magistrate System; Being Appointed Magistrate Judge Tape Seven, March 16, 2004.................................................................................91 Side 1 — First Interpleader Case; Capital Consultants’ Case; Capital Consul- tants’ Case Complications Side 2 — Capital Consultants’ Case Consortium; Judges in Capital Consul- tants’ Case; Magistrate & Article III Judges; Weekly District Court Meet- ings; Magistrate Judges in National Judiciary v Tape Eight, March 23, 2004........................................................................................106 Side 1 — Cochran v. Brooke Case; 1960s Criminal Cases; Annette Buchanan Case Side 2 — Journalist’s “Shield Law”; Personal Views versus the Law; Views on the Death Penalty; DNA Evidence; Magistrates Act Tape Nine, March 23, 2004.........................................................................................121 Side 1 — Years as a Magistrate Judge; Family Tragedies; Appointment as Article III Judge; Joining the Court of Appeals Side 2 — Justice Department Interview; Appeals Court Judicial Diversity; Being on the Court of Appeals; Various Paths to the Bench Tape Ten, March 30, 2004 (video recording)...............................................................136 Side 1 — Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh Era; Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh in Court Side 2 — Rajneesh Guilty Plea; Trials of Rajneesh Followers; Media Attention to Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh; Appeals Court Administrative Changes Tape Eleven, March 30, 2004 (video recording).........................................................151 Side 1 — Motions and Screening Panel; Ninth Circuit Judicial Council; Ninth Cir- cuit Case Assignment; Role of Chief Judge; Work of Appeals Court Side 2 — Cases Heard en banc; Exemplary Judges; Splitting the Ninth Circuit; Keeping Current on Decisions; Death Penalty Cases Tape Twelve, March 30, 2004.....................................................................................166 Side 1 — Review of Materials for Cases; Being Decisive on the Bench; Wen Ho Lee Case; Mediating Wen Ho Lee Case Side 2 — Mediating Wen Ho Lee Case, cont.; Mediated Resolution Jeopardized Tape Thirteen, April 13, 2004....................................................................................180 Side 1 — Wen Ho Lee Case Resolution; Judicial Statements in Court; Wen Ho Lee Plea Agreement; Court Officials and Proceedings Side 2 — Finding Constitutional Issues in Cases; Foreign Intelligence Surveil- lance Court of Review Tape Fourteen, April 13, 2004....................................................................................194 Side 1 — Surveillance Court Legislative History; re: Sealed Case; Thoughts on Patriot Act Side 2 — Approach to Writing Opinions; Court of Appeals Caseload; Selecting Law Clerks; Court of Appeals Collegiality Tape Fifteen, April 13, 2004.......................................................................................208 Side 1 — Court of Appeals Changes; Changing Nature of Appeals’ Cases; Judicial Tenure Act Side 2 — Indeterminate Sentencing; Evolution of Judicial Philosophy; Visiting Other Circuit Courts; Rewards of Judicial Career; Retirement of Judges; Future of Judicial System; Defining Privacy Endnotes........................................................................................................................224 vi vii FOREWORD The Oral History Project of the District Court of Oregon Historical Society began in 1983. Through the efforts of Judge James Burns and his wife Helen, a gathering of lawyers, judges, and historians took place at the Society’s inception. The Honorable Robert F. Peckham, District Judge for the Northern District of California, discussed the Northern District Historical Society and the inspiration was born for Oregon’s District Court Historical Society, the second such organization in the country. The original Board of Directors of the Society was composed of twenty-one members with bylaws including the Presiding Judge of the Court, the Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court, and the President and a representative of the Oregon State Bar. The original officers and directors included outstanding judges and lawyers – Judge John Kilkenny, Honorary Chair, Judge James Burns, Chairman, Randall Kester, President, Manley Strayer, Vice President, Elizabeth Buehler, Treasurer, Susan Graber, Corporate Secretary, and Robert M. Christ, Executive Secretary, along with many other top names in Oregon’s legal history. The Society decided to collect, study, preserve, analyze, and disseminate information concerning the history, development, character, operations, and accomplishments of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. It was therefore logical that the Oral History Project should be established to preserve the histories of the judges, law firms, and lawyers who actively practice in the Court. With the assistance of Rick Harmon and James Strassmaier, the Oregon Historical Society held seminars to educate volunteers in taking oral histories with a biographical and Court-oriented focus. The Oregon Historical Society has been most viii cooperative in agreeing to maintain these histories in their permanent collection for study by scholars and other interested parties. These oral history interviews have been taken by recording devices, and are either transcribed or transcription is underway. A transcript reproduces, as faithfully as possible, the original sound recording that reflects the special value of oral history, namely its free and personal expressiveness. Most of the transcripts in the District Court Collection have been lightly edited and reviewed for clarity and accuracy by the narrators. That process continues. It is through these wonderful oral histories that the story of the Court is told. We now have recorded nearly 120 individuals since the project began. The goal is to record the individual histories of all the judges of the Court, as well as those of participating lawyers. The Court has a rich tradition reflected in the activities of the judges and lawyers of the Court. The recording has been done not only by professional historians, but also by dedicated volunteers. As one such volunteer said, “The opportunity to interview someone that you always admired is truly an exciting experience.” The history of the Court is being created by the men and women who have participated in its collection and activities. The Society’s goals are to collect as much of that history as possible, because is it the history of the law and those who make it that constitutes the moral development of humanity. All of us who are students of the law venerate it. We are also interested in the people who make it. Judge Owen Panner February 28, 2006 ix INTRODUCTION During the spring of 2004, Judge Leavy recorded his oral history with oral historian Clark Hansen. Leavy’s interview covers his early life in Oregon, his decision to study law, and his legal career from law school to private
Recommended publications
  • List of Judges 1985–2017 Notre Dame Law School

    List of Judges 1985–2017 Notre Dame Law School

    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Annual Moot Court Showcase Argument Conferences, Events and Lectures 2017 List of Judges 1985–2017 Notre Dame Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndls_moot_court Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Notre Dame Law School, "List of Judges 1985–2017" (2017). Annual Moot Court Showcase Argument. 1. http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndls_moot_court/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences, Events and Lectures at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Annual Moot Court Showcase Argument by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. List of Judges that Have Served the Moot Court Showcase Argument 2009 to present held in McCarten Court Room, Eck Hall of Law Updated: March 2017 Name Yr. Served ND Grad Court Judge Alice Batchelder 3/3/2017 U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit Chief Justice Matthew Durrant 3/3/2017 Utah Supreme Court NDLS 1992 Judge John Blakey 3/3/2017 BA-UND 1988 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Chief Justice Matthew G. Durrant 2/25/2106 Utah Supreme Court Judge Alice Batchelder 2/25/2016 U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen Kelly 2/25/2016 BA-UND 1983 U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Judge Joel F. Dubina 2/26/2015 U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit Chief Judge Frederico A. Moreno 2/26/2015 United States District Court - Miami, FL Judge Patricia O'Brien Cotter 2/26/2015 NDLS 1977 Montana Supreme Court Judge Margaret A.
  • On Linde, Lawmaking, and Legacies Philip

    On Linde, Lawmaking, and Legacies Philip

    HONORING HANS: ON LINDE, LAWMAKING, AND LEGACIES PHILIP P. FRicKEY* It is a great honor to present the keynote address at this symposium, "Unparalleled Justice: The Legacy of Hans Linde." The symposium raises several concerns, however. First, consider the title. In his wonderful book, The Devil's Dictionary, Ambrose Bierce defined "legacy" as "a gift from one who is legging it out of this vale of tears."' Yet the work of Hans Linde remains vigorous and ongoing. Indeed, to those of us who know and follow his activities, he remains the Energizer bunny of public law at the age of 82. He just keeps right on going, on the Council of the American Law Institute, on the Oregon Law Commission, and in conversation with students and scholars alike. Second, in honoring Hans, we run the risk of duplication. This is not the first festschrift for him.2 To see if I could find anything new to say, I ran a Google search. I discovered the following: "Hans Linde happens to have a big thing for blondes."3 Alas, it turns out that this particular Hans Linde is a middle-aged fellow who lives in Germany and is involved in some sort of flight simulation club. This Hans Linde likes to simulate flights to Scandinavia. Not our Hans Linde. But for a moment there, I thought I had a new headline for all *Alexander F. and May T. Morrison Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley (Boalt Hall). This essay encompasses the keynote address presented at the Willamette University College of Law Symposium, UnparalleledJustice: The Legacy of Hans Linde, held on October 27, 2006, supplemented by light footnoting.
  • Symposium:Jurocracy and Distrust:Reconsidering The

    Symposium:Jurocracy and Distrust:Reconsidering The

    User Name: Tyler Cooper Date and Time: Monday, May 20, 2019 6:05:00 PM EDT Job Number: 89258756 Document (1) 1. SYMPOSIUM:JUROCRACY AND DISTRUST:RECONSIDERING THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS PROCESS:JUDICIAL SELECTION AND DEMOCRATIC THEORY: DEMAND, SUPPLY, AND LIFE TENURE, 26 Cardozo L. Rev. 579 Client/Matter: -None- | About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2019 LexisNexis Tyler Cooper SYMPOSIUM:JUROCRACY AND DISTRUST:RECONSIDERING THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS PROCESS:JUDICIAL SELECTION AND DEMOCRATIC THEORY: DEMAND, SUPPLY, AND LIFE TENURE January, 2005 Reporter 26 Cardozo L. Rev. 579 * Length: 27441 words Author: Judith Resnik* * Arthur Liman Professor of Law, Yale Law School. © Judith Resnik 2005. This article stems from presentations at the Symposium, Jurocracy, at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in March of 2004 and at the Symposium, Judicial Appointments in a Free and Democratic Society, at the University of Toronto Law School in April of 2004, and builds on my articles "Uncle Sam Modernizes his Justice System": Inventing the District Courts of the Twentieth Century, 90 Geo. L.J. 607 (2002), Trial as Error, Jurisdiction as Injury: Transforming the Meaning of Article III, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 924 (2000), and Changing Criteria for Judging Judges, 84 Nw. U. L. Rev. 889 (1990), as well as on testimony that I submitted to subcommittees of the United States Senate and of the Canadian House of Commons on the topic of judicial nominations. I benefited from comments of other participants, the exchanges at these symposia and hearings, and from discussions with Seyla Benhabib and Deborah Hensler. My thanks to Joseph Blocher, Andrew Goldstein, Paige Herwig, Johanna Kalb, Alison Mackenzie, Jennifer Peresie, Bertrall Ross, Kirby Smith, Laura Smolowe, and Steven Wu for research assistance, to Gene Coakley for all his efforts to locate relevant materials, and to Denny Curtis, Vicki Jackson, Roy Mersky, Roberta Romano, and Albert Yoon for helpful comments on earlier drafts.
  • Law Review Scholarship in the Eyes of the Twenty-First Century Supreme Court Justices: an Empirical Analysis

    Law Review Scholarship in the Eyes of the Twenty-First Century Supreme Court Justices: an Empirical Analysis

    2012] APPENDIX TO 4 DREXEL L. REV. 399 A-1 LAW REVIEW SCHOLARSHIP IN THE EYES OF THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY SUPREME COURT JUSTICES: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS Brent E. Newton APPENDIX: OPINIONS ISSUED DURING 2001-11, IN WHICH ONE OR MORE JUSTICES CITED AT LEAST ONE LAW REVIEW ARTICLE 1. Solid Waste Agency of N. Cook Cnty. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng‘rs, 531 U.S. 159 (2001). Id. at 177 (Stevens, J., dissenting) (citing Sam Kalen, Commerce to Conservation: The Call for a National Water Policy and the Evolution of Federal Jurisdiction Over Wetlands, 69 N.D. L. REV. 873 (1993)). Author: Associate, Van Ness, Feldman & Curtis Law Review Ranking: 454 Id. at 178 n.4 (Stevens, J., dissenting) (citing Garrett Power, The Fox in the Chicken Coop: The Regulatory Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 63 VA. L. REV. 503 (1977)). Author: Professor of Law, University of Maryland School of Law Law Review Ranking: 6 Id. at 195–96 (Stevens, J., dissenting) (citing Richard L. Revesz, Rehabilitating Interstate Competition: Rethinking the ―Race-to-the-Bottom‖ Rationale for Federal Environmental Regulation, 67 N.Y.U. L. REV. 1210 (1992)). Author: Professor of Law, New York University Law Review Ranking: 5 2. Glover v. United States, 531 U.S. 198 (2001). No citations 3. Gitlitz v. Comm‘r of Internal Revenue, 531 U.S. 206 (2001). Id. at 221 (Breyer, J., dissenting) (citing James F. Loebl, Does the Excluded COD Income of an Insolvent S Corporation Increase the Basis of the Shareholders‘ Stock?, 52 U.
  • Columbia Law Review

    Columbia Law Review

    COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW VOL. 99 DECEMBER 1999 NO. 8 GLOBALISM AND THE CONSTITUTION: TREATIES, NON-SELF-EXECUTION, AND THE ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING John C. Yoo* As the globalization of society and the economy accelerates, treaties will come to assume a significant role in the regulation of domestic affairs. This Article considers whether the Constitution, as originally understood, permits treaties to directly regulate the conduct of private parties without legislative implementation. It examines the relationship between the treaty power and the legislative power during the colonial, revolutionary, Framing, and early nationalperiods to reconstruct the Framers' understandings. It concludes that the Framers believed that treaties could not exercise domestic legislative power without the consent of Congress, because of the Constitution'screation of a nationallegislature that could independently execute treaty obligations. The Framers also anticipatedthat Congress's control over treaty implementa- tion through legislation would constitute an importantcheck on the executive branch'spower in foreign affairs. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................... 1956 I. Treaties, Non-Self-Execution, and the Internationalist View ..................................................... 1962 A. The Constitutional Text ................................ 1962 B. Globalization and the PoliticalBranches: Non-Self- Execution ............................................. 1967 C. Self-Execution: The InternationalistView ................
  • James Redden MO: Michael O’Rourke

    James Redden MO: Michael O’Rourke

    James A. Redden SR #1245 United States District Court Oral History Project November 30, 1994 - January 14, 2002 JR: James Redden MO: Michael O’Rourke Tape 1, Side 1 1994 November 30 MO: This is Michael O’Rourke with the Oregon Historical Society. The date is November 30, 1994, and this is the beginning of an oral history with James Redden. Today’s interview is in his chambers at the courthouse. As I said, today I’d like to talk about your earliest memories. Maybe we could start off by having you tell me a little bit about your mother and father and who they were, maybe starting with your father. JR: My father had the same name, James A. Redden; he was the first, I’m the second, and my son, James A. Redden III, of course lives here in Portland. My father was born at the turn of the century, one of eleven children of Eugene Redden and Ellen Tyrone McQuade Redden. His family came from Ireland. I believe it would be my great-great-great-grandfather, and maybe great-great-great-great-grandfather—I’ve got some records of that at home, and I’ll try to clarify that for you—but he came from Ireland as they say before the potato famine; that is, there was a relatively large group of Irish that moved over here before the potato famine, many of them artisans, as was he. He was a coppersmith and then moved to Albany, New York. Then I believe it was my great-grandfather that moved from Albany to Springfield, Massachusetts, and my grandfathers were a series of Eugene Reddens, which was my grand- father’s name.
  • 1 the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs

    1 the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs

    The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs Oral History Project LAURENCE H. SILBERMAN Interviewed by: Charles Stuart Kennedy Initial interview date: September 23, 1998 Copyright 2000 ADST TABLE OF CONTENTS Background Born and raised in Pennsylvania and New Jersey Dartmouth College; Harvard Law School World War II influence McCarthy and communism President Eisenhower’s anti-McCarthy speech U.S. Army reserve Derek Bok influence Harvard politics Political views Hawaii - Private Law Practice 1961-1967 Labor law Union organizations Harry Bridges Senator Hiram Fong Republican Party Vietnam War sentiment Department of Labor - NLRB 1967-1969 Appellate lawyer Solicitor of Labor (General Counsel) Labor management affairs Department of Labor - Under Secretary 1970-1973 Nixon administration Secretary of Labor George Shultz Kissinger-Shultz comparison Nixon involvement Ehrlichman White House influence Unions’ political orientation George McGovern 1 Deputy Attorney General 1973-1975 Saturday Night Massacre Archibald Cox Yugoslavia - Ambassador 1975-1977 Recalling 1969-1970 ILO Geneva Conference U.S. unions anti-communism George Meany Lane Kirkland “Towards Presidential Control of the State Department” “Europe’s Fiddler on the Roof” Tito and tactics Soviet-West power struggle World War II fears Internal debate on Yugoslavia Kissinger views of USSR future U.S. ambassador’s 1974-1975 meeting Sonnenfeldt Doctrine Foreign Service officer (FSO) attitude towards political appointees Mack Toon Embassy friction DCM problems CODELs Understanding
  • The United States Government Manual 1997/1998

    The United States Government Manual 1997/1998

    The United States Government Manual 1997/1998 Office of the Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration ?1 Revised May 30, 1997 Raymond A. Mosley, Director of the Federal Register. John W. Carlin, Archivist of the United States. On the Cover: Jackie Robinson as a Brooklyn Dodger infielder (from the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration's Still Pictures Branch, 306±PS± 50±4370). The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) joins the Nation in celebrating the 50th anniversary of Jackie Robinson's breaking the color barrier in major league baseball. NARA's mission is to ensure access to essential evidence that documents the rights of American citizens, the actions of Federal officials, and the national experience through its nationwide system of repositories, public programs, and Federal Register publications. Records from NARA's holdings reflect that Robinson's contributions extended well beyond the playing field to the larger field of law and government. Every American President who held office between 1956 and 1972 received letters from Jackie Robinson expressing the passionate and, at times, combative spirit with which Robinson worked to remove the racial barriers in American society so that all citizens would receive rights guaranteed by the Constitution. For more information on Jackie Robinson's legacy as seen through Federal records, visit NARA's Digital Classroom exhibit, Jackie Robinson: Beyond the Playing Field (Internet, http://www.nara.gov/education/), a collection of correspondence, photographs, and three lesson plans that focus on civil rights history, character education values, and civic responsibility. Special thanks to CMG Worldwide and the Robinson family for their cooperation and permission to use the Jackie Robinson image and the 50th anniversary logo on this year's Manual cover.
  • 2002-2003 Year in Review

    2002-2003 Year in Review

    Oregon Lawyer 2 0 0 3 UNIVERSITY OF OREGON SCHOOL OF LAW Since 1884, Oregon’s Public 2002-2003 Law School YEAR IN REVIEW NEW STUDENTS Academically Impressive, Geographically Diverse— and More Applicants PROFESSORS Federal Prosecutor, Corporate Attorneys Join Faculty PROGRAMS Appropriate Dispute Resolution and Environmental Law Programs Expand, Portland Business Program Grows. Public Interest/Pro Bono Champs Again! PICTURES Four Seasons at the Knight Law Center, 2003 Commencement and Frohnmayer Award Banquet KUDOS Volunteers Transform Law Students into Lawyers WWW.LAW.UOREGON.EDU U O S C H O O L O F L A W MESSAGE FROM THE DEAN NEW FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATORS, are using our new space in the Portland Center STRENGTHENED PROGRAMS AMONG building owned by the UO for summer school FIRST YEAR ACCOMPLISHMENTS classes, student recruitment, and career services activities. It has been an exciting and eventful first year, and We continue to add energetic new faculty with I am very pleased with the steps forward that the impressive academic and practice credentials to law school has taken. our ranks. Tom Lininger, who previously worked This year we had 1,900 as a federal prosecutor in Oregon and with the applicants for 180 places law firm of Skadden, Arps in San Francisco, will in our entering class, be teaching evidence and legal profession. Judd and the students we Sneirson, who previously worked for Willkie, admitted as the Class of Farr & Gallagher in New York and as a law clerk 2006 are among the best for a federal judge, will be teaching contracts credentialed and most and business associations.
  • Ten Lessons in Appellate Advocacy

    Ten Lessons in Appellate Advocacy

    Federal Trade Commission Ten Lessons in Appellate Advocacy Remarks of J. Thomas Rosch Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission before the Howrey LLP Antitrust Fundamentals Seminar Washington, DC February 24, 2011 Last Fall at the ABA Antitrust Section’s Masters Course in Williamsburg, I talked about some of the lessons—both good and bad— that I learned during the forty-plus years I was an antitrust trial lawyer.1 There were more lessons I could have shared—like who gets to sit closest to the jury (it’s always plaintiff’s counsel, as Bill Schwarzer and I learned to our dismay one day when, representing Chrysler, we tried to preempt those coveted seats only to have the trial judge The views stated here are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission or other Commissioners. I am grateful to my attorney advisor, Henry Su, for his invaluable assistance in putting these thoughts to paper. 1 J. Thomas Rosch, Can Antitrust Trial Skills Really Be “Mastered”? Tales Out of School About How to Try (or Not to Try) an Antitrust Case, Remarks Presented at the ABA Section of Antitrust Law Antitrust Masters Course (Sept. 30, 2010), available at http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/rosch/100930roschmasterscourseremarks.pdf. (old Judge William Sweigert) sternly tell us to take our proper places).2 And whether there’s any point, as a defendant, in contesting the seating of a 6-person instead of a 12-person civil jury (there isn’t, though that would always seem to favor the plaintiff, given the unanimity requirement).3 But today I’d like to talk about something else: appellate advocacy.4 More specifically, I’d like to share with you some of the good and bad things I have learned about that subject over the same forty years and a lot of appellate arguments.
  • Deconstructing the Administrative State: Chevron Debates and the Transformation of Constitutional Politics

    Deconstructing the Administrative State: Chevron Debates and the Transformation of Constitutional Politics

    DECONSTRUCTING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE: CHEVRON DEBATES AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL POLITICS CRAIG GREEN* ABSTRACT This Article contrasts Reagan-era conservative support for Chevron U.S.A. v. NRDC with conservative opposition to Chevron deference today. That dramatic shift offers important context for understanding how future attacks on the administrative state will develop. Newly collected historical evidence shows a sharp pivot after President Obama’s reelection, and conservative opposition to Chevron deference has become stronger ever since. The sudden emergence of anti-Chevron critiques, along with their continued growth during a Republican presidency, suggests that such arguments will increase in power and popularity for many years to come. Although critiques of Chevron invoke timeless rhetoric about constitutional structure, those critiques began at a very specific moment, and that historical coincidence fuels existing skepticism about such arguments’ substantive merit. This Article analyzes institutional questions surrounding Chevron with deliberate separation from modern politics. Regardless of one’s substantive opinions about President Trump, federal regulation, or administrative deference, this Article identifies extraordinary costs to the legal system of overruling Chevron through mechanisms of constitutional law. * Professor of Law, Temple University Beasley School of Law; Ph.D., Princeton University; J.D., Yale Law School. Many thanks for comments from participants at the Federal Administrative Law Judges Conference and the Philadelphia Law Department’s Annual Conference. Thanks also for individual suggestions from Kent Barnett, Jane Baron, Pamela Bookman, Heather Elliott, Kellen Funk, Tara Leigh Grove, Joseph Hall, Jonathan Lipson, Jane Manners, Gillian Metzger, Henry Monaghan, Andrea Monroe, Lauren Ouziel, Rachel Rebouché, Dan Rodgers, and Neil Siegel.
  • Unpublished Court of Appeals Decisions: a Hard Look at the Process†

    Unpublished Court of Appeals Decisions: a Hard Look at the Process†

    UNPUBLISHED COURT OF APPEALS DECISIONS: A HARD LOOK AT THE PROCESS† STEPHEN L. WASBY‡ I. INTRODUCTION The burgeoning caseload of the U.S. courts of appeals, which has outpaced the increase in district court filings and also has risen more rapidly than has the number of appellate judges, has caused a problem for these courts. As mandatory jurisdiction courts which must rule on all appeals brought to them, even if the issues are elementary and the answers obvious, what should they do? Both formally and informally, they have used a type of triage by sorting out cases for differing types of treatment. To aid in coping, for over thirty years the courts of appeals have issued dispositions which are not published and which are not to be cited as precedent. Whether dispositions become published opinions or unpublished memoranda is a result of the judges, clerks, and parties who prepare them and the process through which dispositions move. A published opinion may have started as such, or it may have been proposed as an unpublished judgment. A disposition that began life as a proposed memorandum disposition may see the light of day as a published opinion, and there may have been debate within the panel of judges as to the type of disposition to be issued. Because it is time for systematic attention to the actuality of practices in the courts of appeals leading to unpublished dispositions,1 this article is offered to provide some empirical groundwork about the process † This article is based on a paper presented to the Midwest Political Science Association (Chicago, Ill.