This Essay explores the instrumental and normative considerations that prompt judges to publish separate opinions. After discussing the traditions of separate writing in American judicial practice, the author provides a contemporary judge's perspective on the aims of separate opinions and on the cost-benefit analysis that judges invariably undertake when contemplating whether to write a concurrence or dissent. Turning to her own work on the Seventh Circuit, the author then identifies three broad categories of dissents she has penned over the past sixteen years: "principle-based dissents," "process-based dissents," and "accuracy-focused dissents." The Essay concludes by suggesting that a more forthright appraisal of the dynamics of decisionmaking on multi-member courts could benefit the judicial system as a whole.
When to Hold, When to Fold, and When to Reshuffle: The Art of Decisionmaking on a Multi-Member Court
|
VIEW PDF
Circuit: Archived Content
RECENT POSTS
Drone Federalism: Civilian Drones and the Things They Carry
- Margot E. KaminskiBook Review of The Laws of Spaceflight: A Guidebook for New Space Lawyers
- Glenn Harlan ReynoldsThe Twenty-First Century Fingerprint: Previewing Maryland v. King
- Keagan D. BuchananRace, Descent, and Tribal Citizenship
- Bethany R. BergerBY DATE
- June 2013 (1)
- May 2013 (2)
- April 2013 (2)
- March 2013 (1)
- December 2012 (1)
- October 2012 (1)
- September 2012 (1)
- July 2012 (1)
BY CATEGORY
- 2011 Jorde Symposium (5)
- 2012 AALS Section on Law and Humanities Program (9)
- banquet (1)
- birth control (1)
- california supreme court (1)
- chesney (1)
- cole (1)
- constitutional democracy (1)
- consumer protection (1)
- Crime (1)
- Deportation (1)
- detention (1)
- dodd-frank (1)
- domestic violence (1)
- elkins (1)
- family (1)
- fourth amendment (1)
- Germany (1)
- Independence (1)
- information behavior (1)
- intersex (1)
- John Yoo (1)
- judicial restraint (6)
- law schools (1)
- partisanship (1)
- party politics (1)
- popular democracy (1)
- Privacy (2)
- Professionalism (1)
- Prosser (1)
- Prosser Symposium (1)
- Punishment (1)
- sterilization (1)
- Tort (1)
- Torture (1)
- war powers (1)
- Yoo (1)
- zelon (1)
NEWS & EVENTS
SYMPOSIA
META
The California Law Review is the preeminent legal publication at the UC Berkeley School of Law.
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.