Issue 3 - April 2009 Kimbrough and Gall: Taking Another “Crack” at Expanding Judicial Discretion Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

Kimbrough and Gall: Taking Another “Crack” at Expanding Judicial Discretion Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

This Comment examines the Court’s decisions in Gall and Kimbrough and discusses their ramifications. Part II examines the history of the Guidelines and discusses the jurisprudential evolution leading up to Gall and Kimbrough. Part III sets forth a detailed analysis and critique of both opinions. Part IV explores both the practical and legal impact of …

Read Article Read More

Special Issue - April 2009 Higher Law Questions: A Prelude to the Symposium

Higher Law Questions: A Prelude to the Symposium

This conference asks us to consider two questions that are unusual for an academic conference in our time. They might have seemed like unusual questions in earlier times as well-but for a different reason: the answers might have seemed so plain that the questions hardly needed asking. “Is there a higher law? And does it …

Read Article Read More

Issue 3 - April 2009 Another Jackpot (In)Justice: Verdict Variability and Issue Preclusion in Mass Torts

Another Jackpot (In)Justice: Verdict Variability and Issue Preclusion in Mass Torts

What if, in a case involving a single plaintiff, a corporate defendant in a mass tort litigation faces a single jury of six people that finds, in a special interrogatory, that the corporation’s product is defective? That single finding by six people on one jury could well result in a finding of defectiveness for the …

Read Article Read More

Special Issue - April 2009 Introduction

Introduction

Symposium introduction by Robert F. Cochran, Jr. This symposium brings together people from the fields of law, history, economics, theology, and philosophy to address whether there is a higher law, whether it matters, and the numerous other questions that flow from these questions. The ordering of the essays in this symposium is not based on …

Read Article Read More

Issue 3 - April 2009 The Saucier Qualified Immunity Experiment: An Empirical Analysis

The Saucier Qualified Immunity Experiment: An Empirical Analysis

This paper provides an empirical analysis of the impact of the approach to qualified immunity that the Supreme Court first suggested in Siegert v. Gilley and later made mandatory in Saucier v. Katz. That approach dictates that lower courts should resolve constitutional issues prior to deciding whether a government official is shielded from liability by …

Read Article Read More

Issue 2 - March 2009 Red Lion and Pacifica: Are They Relics?

Red Lion and Pacifica: Are They Relics?

Geoffrey Stone’s fine keynote address offers a superb summary of the lessons of twentieth century First Amendment litigation. Like Stone’s monumental Perilous Times and his Chicago predecessor Harry Kalven’s A Worthy Tradition, Stone is largely celebratory of the Supreme Court and its more modem interpretations of the First Amendment. Much of my work on the …

Read Article Read More