Courts

Status Courts

Courts II

I intuitively agree with Segal and Spaeth's conclusion that Supreme Court justices are guided in their decision-making by their personal beliefs and attitudes. For one thing, if jurists ideological beliefs were not important, the party of the president who nominated a justice would not matter, which seems clearly at odds with the facts. I also acknowledge the difficulties the authors face in at...

The Verdict on Drug Courts and Other Problem-Solving Courts

Scientists, in contrast, rarely speak of verdicts. To the scientist, virtually all conclusions are provisional and subject to revision as new data become available. Much of what is believed to be true turns out, after the collection of more information, to be only partially true, conditionally true, or sometimes outright false.1 It is, therefore, most prudent to withhold final judgment until al...

When Courts Collide: Integrated Domestic Violence Courts and Court Pluralism

This Article proposes court pluralism as a new theory for analyzing the role of the justice system in addressing domestic violence. It argues that a systemic view of the justice system is essential to developing coherent reform strategies, and lays out the foundation for taking into account the unique functions of civil and criminal justice in domestic violence cases. In doing so, the Article c...

The Jeffersonian Crisis: Courts

This is an extremely ambitious book, for in its relatively brief compass it undertakes to discuss three aspects of the Jeffersonian era: (1) the contest for control of the national judiciary, usually personified as a struggle of the titans, Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall; (2) the battle for reform of the judiciary at the state and local level; and (3) the meaning of Jeffersonian democracy a...