The Courts and the People in a Democratic System: Against Federal Courts’ Exceptionalism

IF 1 3区社会学 Q2 LAW

Notre Dame Law Review Pub Date : 2016-09-27 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2844320

S. Grossi

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The law of federal procedure is on the Supreme Court’s docket for the October 2016 Term, with granted petitions addressing pleading sufficiency, standing, and jurisdiction. And, of course, the Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure continues its annual tinkering with the rules in an elusive effort to micromanage federal practice. That reality, coupled with recent exchanges with colleagues on procedural interpretation and reform, has prompted these reflections on the role of procedure in our democratic system. This short essay is intended to summarize those reflections, which are more extensively elaborated in my other works.

查看原文本刊更多论文

民主制度中的法院与人民:反对联邦法院的例外论

联邦诉讼法律在最高法院2016年10月任期的案卷上，其中包括批准的请愿书，涉及辩护的充分性、地位和管辖权。当然，民事诉讼规则咨询委员会(Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure)每年都在对规则进行修修补补，试图对联邦的实践进行微观管理。这一现实，加上最近与同事就程序解释和改革问题进行的交流，促使我们对程序在我们民主制度中的作用进行思考。这篇短文旨在总结这些思考，这些思考在我的其他作品中得到了更广泛的阐述。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Notre Dame Law Review LAW-

CiteScore

1.20

自引率

11.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： In 1925, a group of eager and idealistic students founded the Notre Dame Lawyer. Its name was changed in 1982 to the Notre Dame Law Review, but all generations have remained committed to the original founders’ vision of a law review “synonymous with respect for law, and jealous of any unjust attacks upon it.” Today, the Law Review maintains its tradition of excellence, and its membership includes some of the most able and distinguished judges, professors, and practitioners in the country. Entirely student edited, the Law Review offers its members an invaluable occasion for training in precise analysis of legal problems and in clear and cogent presentation of legal issues.