Ever since the late 1960s, many lower federal courts have interpreted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to give outsiders broad rights to become parties to pending lawsuits. Intervention of this sort affects the dynamics of a lot of cases, including many of the highest-profile cases that the federal courts hear. Yet it raises fundamental questions about the structure of litigation: should status as a party be limited to people who have legal claims or defenses, or do the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure invite intervention by everyone who will feel the practical effects of a judgment? For the last half century, many federal judges and law professors have pushed for expansive understandings of the right to intervene. That impulse is consistent with the “interest representation” model of litigation, which analogizes judicial decisionmaking to other types of policymaking and touts the benefits of broad participation. According to this Article, however, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure instead reflect a more traditional view of litigation, under which the parties to a case need to be proper parties to a claim for relief.
Supreme Court opinions involving race and the jury invariably open with the Fourteenth Amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, or landmark cases like...
These are momentous times for the comparative analysis of judicial behaviour. Once the sole province of US political scientists, a new generation of...
Constitutional review is the power of a body, usually a court, to assess whether law or government action complies with the constitution. Originating...
Donald J. Trump appointed 234 federal judges in his first term. Trump, as is his wont, claims, with an inflated number, that he appointed a record...
On January 1, 2022, the most radical change to the American jury in at least thirty-five years occurred in Arizona: peremptory strikes, long a feature...
Legal ethicists, advocacy groups, and politicians have called for greater restrictions on the use of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) when parties...
In recent years, the federal courts have seen a plethora of lawsuits originated by states challenging federal government actions. As a result, there...
This casebook aspires to help students understand and think systematically about the techniques of statutory interpretation. It blends exposition with...
This Essay reports data on the impact of Bruen and its predecessor, Heller, on gun rights cases. Put mildly, the impact was substantial, not only in...
In this paper we investigate whether gender is associated with the content of judicial opinions in the U.S. courts of appeals. Using a topic model...
Donald J. Trump's presidency broke the mold in many ways, including how to think about judicial appointments. Unlike other recent presidents, Trump...
How should judges decide hard cases involving rights conflicts? Standard debates about this question are usually framed in jurisprudential terms...
Berryessa et al. (2022) consider how prior experience as a criminal prosecutor may influence judicial behaviour, but their concerns about prior...
A federal grand jury in Florida indicted former President Donald Trump on June 8, 2023, on multiple criminal charges related to classified documents...
In our increasingly polarized society, claims that prosecutions are politically motivated, racially motivated, or just plain arbitrary are more common...
The lawyer-client relationship is pivotal in providing access to courts. This paper presents results from a large-scale field experiment exploring how...
Perhaps the most surprising feature of the last Supreme Court term was the extraordinary public discourse on 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. According to...
Members of the public who are representing themselves in their own legal matters may visit a library seeking legal information. Therefore, the...