Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Is Anybody Out There?

Post author:Tiffany Winter
Post published:June 10, 2009
Post category:Legal Education Marquette Law School

A large part of my life has been devoted to getting into law school (it was not an easy task for me), and now that I am here I find myself slightly disappointed. It is not that I don’t find law school to be challenging or interesting; it is just that it is not as intellectually stimulating as I had hoped. Maybe my expectations are too high, but is it really too much to ask to have an interesting class discussion?

Before I go any further, I want to make sure that everyone understands that I am not faulting the professors for the lack of class participation. The majority, if not all, of the professors I have had at Marquette have tried to elicit class discussions. Students are just unwilling to say anything. Wait, let me correct that: most students are unwilling to say anything. There are some students who participate in every class, and, while I appreciate their contributions, no one wants to hear the same person talk all the time. It is about balance, about involving as many perspectives as possible to gain a greater appreciation for the law and the effects it has on individuals.

Recusal as Censorship?

Post author:Richard M. Esenberg
Post published:June 10, 2009
Post category:Judges & Judicial Process Political Processes & Rhetoric U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s decision on Monday in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company is interesting for what it may portend and for the methodological dispute between the majority and the dissent.

You know (or I’ll tell you) the basic facts. Massey has an important case before the West Virginia Supreme Court – an appeal of a $ 50 million verdict against it and in favor of Caperton and others. Massey’s CEO makes independent expenditures in the amount of $3 million in support of candidate Brent Benjamin. Benjamin wins and so does Massey – by a 3-2 vote with now Justice Benjamin in the majority.

The Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that Benjamin’s failure to recuse himself violated Caperton’s due process rights. So what’s the problem?

Social Framework Evidence in Employment Discrimination Cases

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:June 7, 2009
Post category:Labor & Employment Law Legal Scholarship

I’ve just read a fascinating new article by Paul Secunda and Melissa Hart on the use of expert social science testimony in employment discrimination cases. They report on the conflict, both in the courtroom and in the academy, over the use of so-called “social framework” evidence, which speaks to the tendency of certain workplace policies and practices to promote (or reduce) the impact of stereotyping and bias. The debate echoes debates elsewhere in the law over the use of science that cannot definitively establish causation, but can only deal in likelihoods or relative increases in risk. I am reminded of a case I use in teaching the insanity defense, United States v. Lyons, 731 F.2d 243 (5th Cir. 1984), in which the Fifth Circuit bemoans the inability of psychologists to state with certainty whether a crime resulted from a defendant’s inability to control himself.

Entitled “A Matter of Context: Social Framework Evidence in Employment Discrimination Class Actions,” the full Secunda-Hart article is available here on SSRN. You can read the abstract after the break.