Assessing President Obama's Appointment of Women to the Federal Appellate Courts

A major legacy of the Obama presidency was the mark he left on the federal courts with respect to increasing judicial diversity. In particular, President Obama's appointments of women to the federal judiciary exceeded all previous presidents in terms of both absolute numbers and as a share of all judges; he also appointed a record-setting number of women of color to the lower federal courts. In this Article, I take an intersectional approach to exploring variation in the professional backgrounds, qualifications, and Senate confirmation experiences of Obama's female appeals court appointees, comparing them with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton appointees. These data reveal that women of color appointed by Obama differ from both white women and minority men in terms of ABA ratings, the types of professional experiences they bring with them, and whether they were confirmed by a roll call vote.

The Precipitous Decline in Reasoning and Other Key Abilities with Age and Its Implications for Federal Judges

U. S. Supreme Court justices and other federal judges are, effectively, appointed for life, with no built-in check on their cognitive functioning as they approach old age. There is about a century of research on aging and intelligence that shows the vulnerability of processing speed, fluid reasoning, visual-spatial processing, and working memory to normal aging for men and women at all levels of education; even the maintained ability of crystallized knowledge declines in old age. The vulnerable abilities impact a person’s decision-making and problem solving; crystallized knowledge, by contrast, measures a person’s general knowledge. The aging-IQ data provide a rationale for assessing the key cognitive abilities of anyone who is appointed to the federal judiciary. Theories of multiple cognitive abilities and processes, most notably the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model, provide a well-researched blueprint for interpreting the plethora of findings from studies of IQ and aging. Sophisticated technical advances in test construction, especially in item-response theory and computerized-adaptive testing, allow for the development of reliable and valid theory-based tests of cognitive functioning. Such assessments promise to be a potentially useful tool for evaluating federal judges to assess the impact of aging on their ability to perform at a level their positions deserve, perhaps to measure their competency to serve the public intelligently. It is proposed that public funding be made available to appoint a panel of experts to develop and validate an array of computerized cognitive tests to identify those justices who are at risk of cognitive impairment.

Ninth Circuit Nursery

Based on statistical and textual analysis of the 148 patent cases heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals from its creation through 1925, this chapter suggests that the appeals judges created a legal environment highly favorable to innovative West Coast enterprises. Their rulings consistently sided with local patent holders and alleged infringers over litigants from outside the circuit. Cases involving only local parties produced more mixed results, as judges sought to mediate disputes among competing regional suppliers, while insulating small proprietors from risks of infringement. Through these means, the appeals court actively shaped competition and influenced the course of innovation in such emergent fields as oil drilling and refining, hydraulic machinery, and food processing. The distinctiveness of Pacific Coast patent law diminished after 1915 under influence of a federal judiciary stacked with protégés of ex-President William Howard Taft, who became Chief Justice in 1921.

Supporting Responsive Federal Drug Sentencing Through Education in the Workshop on Science-Informed Decision Making

On the federal level, judicial education in sentencing has been focused primarily on preparing judges to calculate and apply the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. But in an advisory guidelines context, making individualized assessments in drug cases requires education in the science of addictions, the drivers of behavior, and the prospects for behavior change when substances are involved. Neuroscience and the sciences of human behavior provide clarifying insight into substance-driven behaviors and cognitions that are routinely encountered in federal drug cases. These disciplines support individualized sentencing by shedding new light on the nature of inhibitory control, the reasonable expectations for relapse, and the distinctions that can be drawn based on science between different treatment interventions. In this Article, we report on the Workshop on Science-Informed Decision Making, an education initiative in the federal judiciary. Since 2016, it has provided education in neuroscience and behavioral science, as well as skills training in individualizing sentences using insights from that science, to U.S. district judges, magistrate judges, and pretrial services and probation officers in thirty-two federal districts. We describe the case-study-based instructional approach of the workshop, including some of the misconceptions about addiction behavior it addresses, and explain why we believe that this kind of education helps federal judges, and pretrial services and probation officers, craft more responsive sentencing decisions and recommendations.

Disability and access to courts: Assessing the accessibility of U.S. federal judiciary homepages thirty years after the ADA

Using basic accessibility standards, the presence or absence of essential usability features, and site accessibility statements, this study evaluates the accessibility of the home pages of the federal judiciary — those of the U.S. district, Appellate and specialty courts, the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts (AO), the Federal Judicial Center (FJC), and the main homepage of PACER, the federal judiciary’s e-filing and e-records access system. Software evaluations reveal detected instances of a narrow set of accessibility issues, including scripts with no accompanying functional text, images/server-side image maps with no text equivalents/descriptors, and inaccessible forms. Manual evaluations of Web sites show a high proportion (about 67 percent) of the home pages provided skip navigation links, whereas smaller proportions provided direct or indirect links to accessibility information — about 15 percent and 12 percent, respectively, as well as controls for manipulating font size (about 12 percent). Notably, a sizeable proportion (about 45 percent) of home pages provided direct or indirect links to a “BrowseAloud” explanation and download page, apparently in lieu of information on accessibility. Finally, content analysis of existing Web site accessibility pages and policy statements show a high degree of variation, with some being exceptionally detailed and informative, and some less so.

An Invitation to Mexican Courts to Engage with Transnational Sources of Law

In 2009, Mexican Courts started to engage in a transnational conversation between foreign courts. After Mexico was sentenced by the Inter- American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) in the case of Radilla Pacheco, the Mexican Supreme Court determined, among other things, that all national judges must examine the human rights interpretations issued by the Federal Judiciary and the IACHR, choosing the most favorable and effective interpretation to protect human rights, applying the pro homine principle. Nonetheless, nothing has been said about using case law from foreign courts as persuasive authority to find this “most favorable and effective interpretation of human rights” in Mexico. This article analyses whether Mexican courts should take into account the interpretations of foreign courts as persuasive authority when determining standards and scope of human rights, besides IACHR case law. I evaluate different theories that support the use and citation of foreign precedents, as well as arguments that raise concerns about citing foreign courts to interpret domestic legal frameworks. I conclude that, in order to make use of the most effective principles and standards of human rights, as the pro persona principle suggest, Mexican Courts should consider foreign case law.

“In the Mold of Justice Scalia”: The Contours & Consequences of the Trump Judiciary

This article reviews the causes, contours and potential consequences of President Donald J. Trump’s 234 appointments to the federal judiciary. The causes will be familiar to political scientists who are fond of reminding people that “elections have consequences” and that the “Supreme Court [and by extension entire federal judiciary] follows the election returns.” The contours of the Trump Judiciary are congruent with Trump’s campaign promise to appoint judges “in the mold of Justice Scalia,” the conservative legal icon who died suddenly in February 2016. We show how Trump and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell made good on this promise with the help of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, appointing ideologically conservative, young, and mostly male and white judges to lifetime appointments on the federal bench. In laying out the potential consequences of Trump’s remaking of the federal judiciary, we outline three areas where these judges are likely to make an impact on law and politics in the coming decades: rolling back liberal and progressive victories in the culture wars, likely in more subtle ways that align with Alison Gash’s concept of “below-the-radar” legal change; extending the federal deregulation campaign that began in earnest with the Reagan Administration; and issuing rulings in the areas of voting rights, campaign finance, and redistricting that tip the scales of democracy in favor of Republican electoral outcomes.