DOCSLIB.ORG

The Judicial Power and US Foreign Affairs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Judicial Power and US Foreign Affairs Fordham University School of Law’s International Law Journal presents The Judicial Power and US Foreign Affairs Friday, February 21, 2020 10:45 a.m. – 4:45 p.m. Fordham Law School Costantino Room | Second Floor AGENDA 10:20 – 10:45 a.m. Check in and Coffee 10:45 – 10:50 a.m. Dean’s Welcome Remarks Matthew Diller, Dean and Paul Fuller Professor of Law, Fordham Law School 10:50 a.m. – 12:10 p.m. Scholarly Debate: Proper Role of the Supreme Court in Foreign Affairs (1.5 Professional Practice) Z. Payvand Ahdout, Academic Fellow, Columbia Law School Kevin D. Benish, Research Fellow, Center for Transnational Litigation, Arbitration, and Commercial Law, NYU Law Robin Effron, Professor of Law; Co-Director, Dennis J. Block Center for the Study of International Business Law, Brooklyn Law School Martin S. Flaherty, Leitner Family Professor; Co-Director, Leitner Center for International Law and Justice, Fordham University School of Law David Rudenstine, Sheldon H. Solow Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Ryan C. Williams, Assistant Professor of Law, Boston College Law School Moderator: Pamela Bookman, Associate Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law 12:10 – 1:30 p.m. Lunch 1:30 – 2:50 p.m. Evolving Judicial Intervention on US Foreign Policy (1.5 Professional Practice) Kevin Arlyck, Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center Elena Chachko, Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School; Postdoctoral Fellow, Perry World House, University of Pennsylvania Margaret E. McGuinness, Professor of Law; Co-Director, Center for International and Comparative Law, St. John’s University School of Law Beth Stephens, Distinguished Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School Moderator: Martin S. Flaherty, Leitner Family Professor; Co-Director, Leitner Center for International Law and Justice, Fordham University School of Law 2:50 – 3 p.m. Break 3 – 4:30 p.m. How Modern International Relations Impact the Supreme Court: Trends and Prospects (1.5 Professional Practice) Julian G. Ku, Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law, Maurice A. Deane School of Law, Hofstra University Thomas H. Lee, Leitner Family Professor of International Law, Fordham University School of Law; Special Counsel to the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Defense Deborah Pearlstein, Professor of Law; Co-Director, Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law David P. Stewart, Professor from Practice; Co-Director, Global Law Scholars Program; Director, Center on Transnational Business and the Law, Georgetown University Law Center Moderator: Julian Arato, Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School 4:30 – 4:45 p.m. Closing Remarks 4:45 p.m Cocktail Reception SPEAKERS faculty in 2015, Professor Arato served as an numerous US courts. Associate-in-Law at Columbia Law School. Professor Benish is also an associate at the Z. Payvand Ahdout He previously worked as an associate in the law firm of Holwell Shuster & Goldberg LLP Academic Fellow international arbitration group at Freshfields in New York City, where his practice involves Columbia Law School Bruckhaus Deringer, where his practice matters of international litigation, civil Payvand Ahdout is an Academic Fellow focused on international investment disputes procedure, foreign sovereign immunity, and at Columbia Law School. Her research is and international commercial arbitration. questions of US constitutional law. primarily focused on the ways governing institutions use and shape the federal courts and how that informs public law development. Kevin Arlyck Pamela Bookman Associate Professor of Law Prior to joining Columbia, Payvand served as Associate Professor of Law Georgetown University Law Center a law clerk to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Fordham University School of Law Professor Arlyck teaches civil procedure, on the U.S. Supreme Court and to Judge Professor Pamela Bookman is an expert federal courts, and legal history. His Debra Ann Livingston on the U.S. Court of in the fields of Civil Procedure, Contracts, scholarship investigates the early history Appeals for the Second Circuit. She also International Litigation and Arbitration, of the federal courts, with a particular served as a Bristow Fellow in the Office of the and Conflict of Laws. Her scholarship has focus on the courts’ involvement in Solicitor General of the United States. She appeared in the Stanford Law Review, national governance between ratification has previously held a fellowship at NYU Law. the NYU Law Review, the Yale Journal of of the Constitution and the Civil War. His Most recently, she was an appellate litigator International Law, and other leading law scholarship has been published in Law and at Kirkland & Ellis, LLP. journals. History Review, Brigham Young University Payvand received her J.D. from Columbia Law Law Review, and NYU Law Review. He is Prior to entering academia, Professor School, where she was a James Kent Scholar currently working on a book exploring the Bookman was a Counsel in the New York and a recipient of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg important role the federal courts played in office of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr Prize. She received a B.A. with highest early U.S. foreign relations. LLP, where she represented clients in complex distinction from the University of Virginia, commercial business disputes with a focus Before coming to Georgetown, Professor where she was a Jefferson Scholar on transnational litigation and maintained an Arlyck received a J.D. and Ph.D. in history active pro bono practice. from New York University, and he clerked for the Hon. Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Professor Bookman received her B.A. in Julian Arato Court of the United States and the Hon. Russian Literature from Yale University and Professor of Law Robert Katzmann on the U.S. Court of her J.D. from the University of Virginia School Brooklyn Law School Appeals for the Second Circuit. He also held of Law, where she served as an Articles Editor Professor Arato’s research and teaching academic fellowships at Columbia Law and on the Virginia Law Review and received interests include international economic NYU School of Law, and spent several years the Rosenbloom Award for enhancing the law, public international law, international in private practice at Orrick, Herrington & academic experience of her fellow students organizations, contracts, and private law Sutcliffe in New York. Following law school, Professor Bookman theory. He has written extensively on the law clerked for Judge Robert D. Sack of the U.S. of treaties and treaty interpretation, the law Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, of international organizations, and the law Kevin D. Benish President Rosalyn Higgins and Judge Thomas of foreign direct investment. He is currently Research Fellow Buergenthal of the International Court of working on a long- term project on the private Center for Transnational Litigation, Justice, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of law dimensions of international investment Arbitration, and Commercial Law, the U.S. Supreme Court. law. NYU Law At Brooklyn Law School, Professor Arato Kevin Benish is an adjunct professor at the serves as Co-Director for the Dennis J. New York University School of Law, where Elena Chachko Block Center for the Study of International he co-teaches International Litigation and Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School; Business Law. He also serves as a Co-Chair Arbitration and writes in the areas of Civil Postdoctoral Fellow, Perry World House of the Junior International Law Scholars Procedure, Transnational Litigation, Conflict University of Pennsylvania Association (JILSA); as Vice Chair for the of Laws, and Comparative Law. His research Elena Chachko is an SJD candidate at Harvard American Society of International Law (ASIL) interests include US, EU, and Canadian Law School and a Global Order Postdoctoral International Economic Law Interest Group; approaches to extraterritoriality and data Fellow at Perry World House, University of and as a member of the International Law privacy, and the constitutional limitations on Pennsylvania. Her research focuses on the Association Study Group on the Content and adjudicatory jurisdiction over multinational intersection of administrative law, foreign Evolution of the Rules of Interpretation. corporations in the United States. His relations law, national security law, public international law, and empirical approaches Before joining the Brooklyn Law School previous publications have been cited by to public law. Elena’s work has been published legal department of a large investment bank missions to Northern Ireland, Turkey, Hong in the Yale Journal of International Law and to research questions of German and U.S. Kong, Mexico, Malaysia, Kenya, Romania and the American Journal of International Law law. At Brooklyn Law School, she serves as China. He is also a member of the Council on Unbound, among other publications. She was Co-Director for the Dennis J. Block Center for Foreign Relations. He is currently the Chair previously an International Security Program the Study of International Business Law. She of the Council on International Affairs of Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School Belfer is an avid writer, penning op-eds for various the New York City Bar Association, where Center for Science and International Affairs, publications. Professor Effron also edits the he was formerly Chair of the Committee a Graduate Student Associate at the Harvard Civil Procedure and Federal Courts Blog for on International Human Rights, and is a life Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, the Law Professors Blog Network. member of the Council on Foreign Relations. and a teaching fellow in Public International Prior to joining Brooklyn Law School’s faculty, Flaherty’s publications focus upon Law at Harvard Law School, where she was Professor Effron served as a Bigelow Fellow constitutional law and history, foreign affairs, also the coordinator of the Harvard Empirical and Lecturer in Law at the University of and international human rights and appear in Legal Studies Series.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Articles Lightened Scrutiny
    VOLUME 124 MARCH 2011 NUMBER 5 © 2011 by The Harvard Law Review Association ARTICLES LIGHTENED SCRUTINY Bert I. Huang TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1111 I. DEFERENCE ADRIFT? ........................................................................................................... 1116 A. The Judges’ Hypothesis .................................................................................................... 1118 B. In Search of Evidence ...................................................................................................... 1119 II. A NATURAL EXPERIMENT: “THE SURGE” ..................................................................... 1121 A. The Unusual Origins of the Surge ................................................................................... 1122 B. Toward a Causal Story ..................................................................................................... 1123 C. A Second Experiment ....................................................................................................... 1126 III. FINDINGS: LIGHTENED SCRUTINY ............................................................................... 1127 A. The Data ............................................................................................................................. 1127 B. Revealed Deference ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapman Law Review
    Chapman Law Review Volume 21 Board of Editors 2017–2018 Executive Board Editor-in-Chief LAUREN K. FITZPATRICK Managing Editor RYAN W. COOPER Senior Articles Editors Production Editor SUNEETA H. ISRANI MARISSA N. HAMILTON TAYLOR A. KENDZIERSKI CLARE M. WERNET Senior Notes & Comments Editor TAYLOR B. BROWN Senior Symposium Editor CINDY PARK Senior Submissions & Online Editor ALBERTO WILCHES –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Articles Editors ASHLEY C. ANDERSON KRISTEN N. KOVACICH ARLENE GALARZA STEVEN L. RIMMER NATALIE M. GAONA AMANDA M. SHAUGHNESSY-FORD ANAM A. JAVED DAMION M. YOUNG __________________________________________________________________ Staff Editors RAYMOND AUBELE AMY N. HUDACK JAMIE L. RICE CARLOS BACIO MEGAN A. LEE JAMIE L. TRAXLER HOPE C. BLAIN DANTE P. LOGIE BRANDON R. SALVATIERRA GEORGE E. BRIETIGAM DRAKE A. MIRSCH HANNAH B. STETSON KATHERINE A. BURGESS MARLENA MLYNARSKA SYDNEY L. WEST KYLEY S. CHELWICK NICHOLE N. MOVASSAGHI Faculty Advisor CELESTINE MCCONVILLE, Professor of Law CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY HAZEM H. CHEHABI ADMINISTRATION JEROME W. CWIERTNIA DALE E. FOWLER ’58 DANIELE C. STRUPPA BARRY GOLDFARB President STAN HARRELSON GAVIN S. HERBERT,JR. GLENN M. PFEIFFER WILLIAM K. HOOD Provost and Executive Vice ANDY HOROWITZ President for Academic Affairs MARK CHAPIN JOHNSON ’05 JENNIFER L. KELLER HAROLD W. HEWITT,JR. THOMAS E. MALLOY Executive Vice President and Chief SEBASTIAN PAUL MUSCO Operating Officer RICHARD MUTH (MBA ’05) JAMES J. PETERSON SHERYL A. BOURGEOIS HARRY S. RINKER Executive Vice President for JAMES B. ROSZAK University Advancement THE HONORABLE LORETTA SANCHEZ ’82 HELEN NORRIS MOHINDAR S. SANDHU Vice President and Chief RONALD M. SIMON Information Officer RONALD E. SODERLING KAREN R. WILKINSON ’69 THOMAS C. PIECHOTA DAVID W.
    [Show full text]
  • Nysba Spring 2017 | Vol
    NYSBA SPRING 2017 | VOL. 23 | No. 1 Commercial and Federal Litigation Section Newsletter A publication of the Commercial and Federal Litigation Section of the New York State Bar Association www.nysba.org/ComFed Upcoming Commercial and Federal Litigation Section Events and Co-Sponsored Events Thursday, March 30, 2017 Legal Ethics in the Digital Age: Practical Strategies for Using Technology Ethically in Your Practice Live CLE Program and Webcast | 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. | Executive Conference Center | NYC Renowned speakers on ethics, social media and electronic discovery. Learn the ins and outs of protecting privilege in elec- tronic communications. Speakers will also cover managing records in the cloud and organizing client fi les. A panel discus- sion on the do’s and don’ts of attorney social media use and advice to clients. 4.0 MCLE Credits in Ethics. Co-Sponsored by the Commercial and Federal Litigation Section, the Committee on CLE and the Law Practice Management Committee. Basic Lessons on Ethics and Civility 2017 (held in 5 locations) Live CLE Program and Webcast | 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Wednesday, April 5, 2017 in NYC | Friday, April 7, 2017 in Albany | Friday, April 7, 2017 in Rochester Friday, April 28, 2017 | in Amherst | Friday, April 28, 2017 in Melville A sound ethical compass and a civil and professional demeanor are the hallmarks of successful and respected attorneys in all areas of practice. This four hour program will provide attendees with an update on developments in the area of attorney eth- ics, including the most recent case law.
    [Show full text]
  • Informing the Public About the U.S. Supreme Court's Work Ruth Bader Ginsberg Supreme Court of the United States
    Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 29 Article 2 Issue 2 Winter 1998 1998 Informing the Public about the U.S. Supreme Court's Work Ruth Bader Ginsberg Supreme Court of the United States Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj Part of the Legal Education Commons Recommended Citation Ruth B. Ginsberg, Informing the Public about the U.S. Supreme Court's Work, 29 Loy. U. Chi. L. J. 275 (1998). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol29/iss2/2 This Speech is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago Law Journal by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Address Informing the Public about the U.S. Supreme Court's Work Ruth Bader Ginsburg* My remarks this afternoon concern informing the public about the work the Supreme Court does. I will speak of efforts simply to describe the Court's actions (both in-house efforts and press reports), and also of feedback on the Court's dispositions-comment on, or criticism of, the Court's work from people who keep us alert to our fallibility, reviewers who stimulate us to try harder, especially to write more comprehensibly. I. The Court speaks primarily through its opinions. It holds no press conferences and its members appear on no talk shows. But we try, in several ways, to advance public understanding of the Court's role and judgments. On mornings when decisions are announced, opinion authors read aloud in the Courtroom short bench statements, running three to ten minutes in length, summarizing what the Court held and the principal reasons for the decision.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conversation with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Professor Aaron Saiger*
    THE ROBERT L. LEVINE DISTINGUISHED LECTURE A CONVERSATION WITH JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG AND PROFESSOR AARON SAIGER* DEAN MATTHEW DILLER: Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Matthew Diller. I have the honor and privilege of being the Dean of Fordham University School of Law. I sense the anticipation in this room is palpable. We are all incredibly excited to be here, and I want to welcome you to tonight’s Robert L. Levine Distinguished Lecture. Robert L. Levine, as your notes describe in more detail, was a member of the Fordham Law School great Class of 1926 and practiced law for sixty- two years. Before we begin the program, I would like to just say a few words of thanks and acknowledgement. We are grateful to the Levine family, who join us here this evening, for making this lecture possible. Because of their generosity, Fordham Law has been able to host many distinguished guests for this series, including Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the late great Judge Judith Kaye, Judge Robert Katzmann, Judge Raymond Lohier, and of course our illustrious guest tonight, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I would like to thank our President of Fordham University, Father Joseph McShane, and our Provost, Dr. Stephen Freedman, who join us here this evening. I would also like to acknowledge my colleague, Dean Emerita Nina Appel of Loyola University Chicago, who has made a special trip here this evening to be with her good friend Justice Ginsburg. I would like to thank the Fordham Law Review for organizing this event and, in particular, the Review editor Alexa West and members of her family, Joyce West and Jerome Leitner, who are friends of Justice Ginsburg.
    [Show full text]
  • Visiting Judges
    Visiting Judges Marin K. Levy* Despite the fact that Article III judges hold particular seats on particular courts, the federal system rests on judicial interchangeability. Hundreds of judges “visit” other courts each year and collectively help decide thousands of appeals. Anyone from a retired Supreme Court Justice to a judge from the U.S. Court of International Trade to a district judge from out of circuit may come and hear cases on a given court of appeals. Although much has been written about the structure of the federal courts and the nature of Article III judgeships, little attention has been paid to the phenomenon of “sitting by designation”—how it came to be, how it functions today, and what it reveals about the judiciary more broadly. This Article offers an overdue account of visiting judges. It begins by providing an origin story, showing how the current practice stems from two radically different traditions. The first saw judges as fixed geographically, and allowed for visitors only as a stopgap measure when individual judges fell ill or courts fell into arrears with their cases. The second assumed greater fluidity within the courts, requiring Supreme Court Justices to ride circuit—to visit different regions and act as trial and appellate judges—for the first half of the Court’s history. These two traditions together provide the critical context for modern-day visiting. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38ZK55M67 Copyright © 2019 California Law Review, Inc. California Law Review, Inc. (CLR) is a California nonprofit corporation. CLR and the authors are solely responsible for the content of their publications.
    [Show full text]
  • Brooklyn Law Notes Law Brooklyn the Passion of Pips Pips of Passion The
    Brooklyn Law Notes THE MAGAZINE OF BROOKLYN LAW SCHOOL | FALL 2016 Brooklyn Law Notes FALL 2016 The Passion of PipS Race, Technology, and New Faculty Build Fellows at Work the Future of Policing on Excellence Brooklyn Law Notes Dean’s Message Vol. 21, No. 2 We the People Editor-in-Chief Clorinda Valenti Director of Communications Managing Editor Kaitlin Ugolik Class Notes Editor Andrea Polci Associate Director of Alumni Relations Faculty Notes Editor John Mackin Public Relations Manager Contributors Dominick DeGaetano Jesse Sherwood Andrea Strong Peggy Swisher Art Director Ron Hester Photographers Todd France Ron Hester Will O’Hare Peter Tannenbaum Joe Vericker Printer Allied Printing Contact us n a beautiful sun-splashed September day in We welcome letters and comments about Washington, D.C., it was an exquisitely memorable articles in Brooklyn Law Notes. We will experience to be part of the large crowd celebrat- consider reprinting brief submissions ing the opening of the new Smithsonian National in print issues and on our website. OMuseum of African American History and Culture. Words alone tel: 718-780-7966 cannot capture the museum’s full impact, from the metal lattice e mail: [email protected] exterior walls that recall iconic figures once serving as symbolic Web: brooklaw.edu guardians protecting African villages, to the large welcoming m ailing address front porch and the exhibition halls filled with artifacts, art, and Managing Editor Brooklyn Law Notes displays that are vibrant, moving, and often painful and horri- 250 Joralemon Street fying reminders of the struggles, as well as contributions and Brooklyn, New York 11201 triumphs, of African Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Bar Council Quarterly, Pete Eikenberry and Anna Stowe Denicola Celebrate Judge Robert Katzmann’S Tenure As Chief Judge of the Second Circuit
    June/July/Aug. 2020 www.federalbarcouncil.org Vol. XXVII, No. 4 In This Issue: From the Editor ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Bennette D. Kramer recently spoke with Sheila S. Boston, the newly inducted president of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, about some of her goals as president of the City Bar and her view of the current pandemic of racism, the antiracism movement, and a range of other topics. Personal Reflections ......................................................................................................................................... 6 In one of the longest and most in-depth articles ever to appear in the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, Pete Eikenberry and Anna Stowe DeNicola celebrate Judge Robert Katzmann’s tenure as Chief Judge of the Second Circuit. Speaking with more than 20 judges, court staff members, and law school deans, the not-to-be-missed article, “The Remarkable Seven-Year Tenure of Chief Judge Robert Katzmann,” reflects on Judge Katzmann’s background, judicial career, and involvements before and during his tenure as chief judge. From the Bench .............................................................................................................................................. 20 The newest member of the Board of Editors of the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, U.S. Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave, is the author of the next article in this issue, “The Impact of COVID-19
    [Show full text]
  • Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules
    ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON APPELLATE RULES San Diego, CA May 2, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS MEETING AGENDA AND ROSTER............................................................................................... 6 TAB 1 TABLE OF AGENDA ITEMS (MAY 2017) ........................................................ 14 TAB 2 OPENING BUSINESS A. Action Item: Draft Minutes of the October 18, 2017 Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules .......................................... 20 B. Information Items: Draft Minutes of the January 2017 Meeting of the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure .................... 34 C. March 2017 Report to the Judicial Conference ............................... 62 TAB 3 ACTION ITEM: ITEM NO. 12-AP-D (RULES 8, 11, AND 39) A. Reporter’s Memorandum (April 2, 2017) ......................................... 82 B. Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments................................... 88 C. Reporter’s Memorandum (March 13, 2016) ................................. 104 TAB 4 ACTION ITEM: ITEM NO. 11-AP-D (RULE 25) A. Reporter’s Memorandum (April 10, 2017) ..................................... 112 B. Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments................................ 122 C. Memorandum Regarding Civil Rule 5 (April 2017) ..................... 134 D. Comment Filed by Aderant (January 23, 2017) ............................ 150 E. Comment Filed by Michael Rosman (February 2, 2017) ............. 154 F. Comment Filed by Heather Dixon (February 14, 2017) ............... 160 G. Comment Filed by New York City Bar Association
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    2013-2014 Empowering the NY Legal Community Annual Report @NYCLAssoc @NYCLA @New York County Lawyers’ Association TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter from NYCLA’s President ........................................................................... Page i Membership & Communications ....................................................................... Page 1‐5 Event Highlights .................................................................................................. Page 6‐8 Continuing Legal Education Institute .................................................................. Page 8‐10 Pro Bono ............................................................................................................. Page 11‐13 Research and Technology ................................................................................... Page 13‐14 Justice Center ..................................................................................................... Page 14‐16 Task Forces and Working Groups ....................................................................... Page 16‐17 Minority Judicial Internship Program ................................................................. Page 17 Public Policy Initiatives ....................................................................................... Page 17‐18 NGO Status at the United Nations ...................................................................... Page 18 Eppler Award ...................................................................................................... Page 19 Kobak
    [Show full text]
  • Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K
    Cornell Law Review Volume 103 Article 2 Issue 1 November 2017 Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K. Levy Duke University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Courts Commons Recommended Citation Marin K. Levy, Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals, 103 Cornell L. Rev. 65 (2017) Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol103/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\103-1\CRN102.txt unknown Seq: 1 17-NOV-17 13:58 PANEL ASSIGNMENT IN THE FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS Marin K. Levy† It is common knowledge that the federal courts of appeals typically hear cases in panels of three judges and that the composition of the panel can have significant consequences for case outcomes and for legal doctrine more generally. Yet neither legal scholars nor social scientists have focused on the question of how judges are selected for their panels. Instead, a substantial body of scholarship simply assumes that panel assignment is random. This Article provides what, up until this point, has been a missing account of panel assignment. Drawing on a multiyear qualitative study of five circuit courts, including in-depth inter- views with thirty-five judges and senior administrators, I show that strictly random selection is a myth, and an improb- able one at that—in many instances, it would have been im- possible as a practical matter for the courts studied here to create their panels by random draw.
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenge of Immigration Cases for the Courts
    When Legal Representation is De½cient: The Challenge of Immigration Cases for the Courts Robert A. Katzmann Abstract: When the quality of lawyering is inadequate, courts are frustrated in their adjudicative role. Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/daed/article-pdf/143/3/37/1830445/daed_a_00286.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Nowhere is this more apparent than in cases involving immigrants hoping to fend off deportation. As an appellate judge on a court whose immigration docket reached 40 percent of our caseload, I have too often seen de½cient legal representation of immigrants. Although courts are reactive, resolving cases before them, judges can systematically promote the fair and effective administration of justice. With the aid of some outstanding legal talent, I created the Study Group on Immigrant Representation to help address the immigrant representation crisis. Our work has encompassed a variety of activities, including: publishing symposia; conducting studies documenting the enormity of the problem and proposing solutions; creating initiatives to expand pro bono representation; facilitating the ½rst local government funding of direct immigrant legal services; creating legal orientation programs for immigrants; and developing the Immigrant Justice Corps, an innovative fellowship program. These initiatives represent some steps towards easing the crisis in immigrant legal representation. A courtroom has multiple players with different roles, but all would agree that adequate legal repre- sentation of the parties is essential to the fair and effective administration of justice. De½cient repre- sentation frustrates the work of courts and ill serves litigants. All too often, and throughout the country, courts that address immigration matters must con- ROBERT A.
    [Show full text]