Judicial opinion

About: Judicial opinion is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5300 publications have been published within this topic receiving 64803 citations.

Unconscious Influences on Judicial Decision-Making: The Illusion of Objectivity

Abstract: Judicial decision making is influenced by unconscious decisions and motivations - implicit biases This paper explores how implicit bias impacts judicial decision-making, as well as considerations for minimizing negative impacts of implicit bias

The Hierarchy among the Recognized Manifestations (“Sources”) of International Law

Abstract: To enumerate the recognized manifestations of international law, several orders may be followed, depending on the criterion used. One criterion would be the distinction between written and unwritten manifestations. On this basis, the recognized manifestations of international law may be enumerated in the following order: (1) certain decisions of international organizations, (2) treaties, (3) certain judicial decisions – all being written manifestations – (4) custom, (5) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations, (6) complementary natural law – all being unwritten. Another criterion, and a far more meaningful one, is that of hierarchy. Before setting forth the correct hierarchical order among the recognized manifestations of international law, hierarchy as such should briefly be discussed.

The Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt on Islamic Law, Veiling and Civil Rights: An Annotated Translation of Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt Case No. 8 of Judicial Year 17 (May 18, 1996)

Abstract: The jurisprudence of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt is creative and influential in the Arab world. Among its opinions, Case No. 8 of Judicial Year 17, decided on May 18, 1996, is particularly interesting. In this opinion, the SCC argues that a regulation on face-veiling in public schools is consistent not only with Islamic law, but with the Egyptian Constitution's guarantees of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. Not only does it illustrate the SCC's approach to Islamic legal reasoning, but it gives insight into the Court's views with respect to civil and political rights. The case also provides intriguing opportunities for comparative legal scholars. Regulations restricting women's right to veil have been challenged as unconstitutional in many countries. This should thus be of great interest to scholars of comparative law, comparative constitutionalism and international human rights. We provide here an annotated translation of this SCC opinion. We thus hope to facilitate comparative discussion about, inter alia, free exercise of religion, freedom of expression, women's rights, and children's rights.

Judicial decisions and prison reform: the impact of litigation on women prisoners*

Abstract: Despite a decade of prison reform, women in U.S. prisons still suffer discrimination in a wide variety of areas. This paper explores three categories of prison litigation concerning women: sex discrimination; medical care, especially for pregnant women; and parental rights. I discuss the limited impact which judicial decisions have had on conditions within women's prisons, and analyze the reasons for this ineffectiveness. Prior to the 1960s, federal courts in the United States openly refused to interfere with the internal operations of prisons. The courts justified their "hands-off" policy on three grounds: (1) they advanced a "separation of powers" argument, claiming that the prison system was under the authority of the Attorney General whose administrative decisions were not subject to judicial review; (2) they claimed that they lacked professional expertise on prison life; and (3) they did not want to undermine prison discipline (Glick, 1973:284).' In the late 1960s and the early 1970s, however, a political and legal movement emerged within the U.S. prison system, spurred in part by a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that state prisoners could sue state officials in federal court for denial of their constitutional rights (Cooper v. Pate, 1964). Federal judges began to elucidate and protect the legal rights of prisoners, prison law became a new specialty, and judgments increasingly favored prisoners. In 1974 the U.S. Supreme Court declared that "there is no iron curtain drawn between the Constitution and the prisons of this country" (Wolff v. McDonnell, 1974:539). Since the 1,960s, the courts have upheld prisoners' rights in such areas as: freedom of religion; the right of prisoners to assist each other with legal work; the necessity for a prison to maintain a minimally adequate law library for prisoners; limitations on the censorship of mail; procedural fairness regarding prison discipline; and prohibitions of the more inhumane forms of solitary confinement (Krantz, 1976:105). Theoretically, the rights that some prisoners have won should apply to all prisoners. In fact, this is not the case. Women in prison have not benefited from many of the rulings because court decisions have generally been limited to conditions in specific prisons and made in response to suits from male prisoners. It was not until the mid-1970s that female prisoners began taking a more active interest in securing prison reform through litigation. Since then, court decisions have upheld the rights of women prisoners in terms of contact visitations, regular outdoor exercise, and opportunities to be trustees (Mitchell v. Untreiner, 1976); educational and vocational programs (Glover v. Johnson, 1979); and the availability of minimum security jail facilities with their accompanying privileges (Molar v. Gates, 1979). While both men and women suffer tremendously in prison, women have been singled out for certain types of abuse and denial of rights. This paper explores a number of areas of litigation which specifically affect women in prison. First, I give an overview of the conditions of women in prison. Then, I examine judicial decisions within three specific areas of litigation: sex discrimination; medical care, especially for pregnant women; and parental rights. Finally, I explore the relationship between judicial decisions and prison reform by examining prison society and society at large. The paper concludes with reflections on the effectiveness of court-ordered

The Justification of the Judicial Decision

Abstract: ETWEEN the equally unacceptable extremes of mechanical jurisprudence and rule skepticism lies a theory of the justification of the judicial decision which many have thought captures the virtues, while avoiding the difficulties, of both extremes. It shall be my primary concern in the present essay to (1) present a rough sketch of this familiar and widely held theory, (2) detail what I believe are a number of serious objections to it, and (3) outline what seems to me to be a reasonable alternative.