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
Race, Descent, and Tribal Citizenship
- Bethany R. BergerAmerican Indian Legal Scholarship and the Courts: Heeding Frickey’s Call
- Matthew L.M. FletcherHarlan on My Mind: Chief Justice Roberts and the Affordable Care Act
- Timothy P. O’NeillBY DATE
- April 2013 (2)
- March 2013 (1)
- December 2012 (1)
- October 2012 (1)
- September 2012 (1)
- July 2012 (1)
- May 2012 (1)
- April 2012 (2)
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
April 16, 2013
Race, Descent, and Tribal CitizenshipSYMPOSIA
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.