"Coursebook on law and neuroscience, including the bearing of neuroscience on criminal law, criminal procedure, and evidence"--

Since the 1960s, the class action lawsuit has been a powerful tool for holding businesses accountable. Yet years of attacks by corporate America and unfavorable rulings by the Supreme Court have left its future uncertain. In this book, Brian T. Fitzpatrick makes the case for the importance of class action litigation from a surprising political perspective: an unabashedly conservative point of view. Conservatives have opposed class actions in recent years, but Fitzpatrick argues that they should see such litigation not as a danger to the economy, but as a form of private enforcement of the law. He starts from the premise that all of us, conservatives and libertarians included, believe that markets need at least some rules to thrive, from laws that enforce contracts to laws that prevent companies from committing fraud. He also reminds us that conservatives consider the private sector to be superior to the government in most areas. And the relatively little-discussed intersection of those two beliefs is where the benefits of class action lawsuits become clear: when corporations commit misdeeds, class action lawsuits enlist the private sector to intervene, resulting in a smaller role for the government, lower taxes, and, ultimately, more effective solutions. Offering a novel argument that will surprise partisans on all sides, The Conservative Case for Class Actions is sure to breathe new life into this long-running debate.

Every day, in courtrooms around the United States, thousands of criminal defendants are represented by public defenders--lawyers provided by the government for those who cannot afford private counsel. Though often taken for granted, the modern American public defender has a surprisingly contentious history--one that offers insights not only about the "carceral state," but also about the contours and compromises of twentieth-century liberalism. First gaining appeal amidst the Progressive Era fervor for court reform, the public defender idea was swiftly quashed by elite corporate lawyers who believed the legal profession should remain independent from the state. Public defenders took hold in some localities but not yet as a nationwide standard. By the 1960s, views had shifted. Gideon v. Wainwright enshrined the right to counsel into law and the legal profession mobilized to expand the ranks of public defenders nationwide. Yet within a few years, lawyers had already diagnosed a "crisis" of underfunded, overworked defenders providing inadequate representation--a crisis that persists today. This book shows how these conditions, often attributed to recent fiscal emergencies, have deep roots, and it chronicles the intertwined histories of constitutional doctrine, big philanthropy, professional in-fighting, and Cold War culture that made public defenders ubiquitous but embattled figures in American courtrooms.

Marijuana Law, Policy, and Authority is a first-of-its-kind law school casebook in a rapidly-emerging and exciting new field. The accessible, comprehensive, and engaging material guides students through the competing approaches to regulating marijuana, the purposes and effects of those approaches, and the legal authorities for choosing among them. The helpful organization intersperses these issues of substantive law, policy, and authority throughout the discussion of users, suppliers, and third parties. Substantive law materials cover either prohibitions or regulations targeting users, suppliers, or third parties. Policy materials cover the goals of marijuana law and policy as well as the research on the impact of different marijuana policies. Authority materials address the different levels of government—federal, state, and local. Notes, questions, and numerous problems in each chapter provide additional thought-provoking material and help to reinforce student learning. Current, news-headlining cases keep the discussion interesting and lively. Key Features: Internationally renowned author Robert Mikos is the premier authority on marijuana law. He draws upon nearly a decade of professional experience teaching, lecturing, consulting, and writing about marijuana law and policy. Three distinct but inter-woven topics are covered: the substantive law governing marijuana; the policy rationales behind and outcomes produced by different approaches to regulating the drug; and the legal authority to regulate the drug. Students are guided through the multi-faceted legal and policy issues now confronting lawyers, lawmakers, judges, and policy analysts working in this emerging field. Written in a style that is familiar to law students, but also accessible to a much broader audience, including graduate and upper level undergraduate students in courses in policy studies, political science, and criminology. Cutting-edge issues are included that are intellectually engaging for students and professors alike—e.g., how are conflicts between state/ federal law resolved? What are the roles of courts and executive officers in terms of policy? Dives deeply into classic legal issues: contract enforceability and powers of court, Congress, and the state. Notes and Questions following cases offer stimulating fodder for discussion.

Winner of the Scribes Book Award “As brilliantly imaginative as it is urgently timely.” —Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Harvard Law School “At no time more than the present, a defense of expertise-based governance and administration is sorely needed, and this book provides it with gusto.” —Frederick Schauer, author of The Proof A highly original framework for restoring confidence in a government bureaucracy increasingly derided as “the deep state.” Is the modern administrative state illegitimate? Unconstitutional? Unaccountable? Dangerous? America has long been divided over these questions, but the debate has recently taken on more urgency and spilled into the streets. Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule argue that the administrative state can be redeemed so long as public officials are constrained by morality and guided by stable rules. Officials should make clear rules, ensure transparency, and never abuse retroactivity, so that current guidelines are not under constant threat of change. They should make rules that are understandable and avoid issuing contradictory ones. These principles may seem simple, but they have a great deal of power. Already, they limit the activities of administrative agencies every day. In more robust form, they could address some of the concerns of critics who decry the “deep state” and yearn for its downfall. “Has something to offer both critics and supporters...a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate over the constitutionality of the modern state.” —Review of Politics “The authors freely admit that the administrative state is not perfect. But, they contend, it is far better than its critics allow.” —Wall Street Journal

The Regulatory State, Third Edition is distinguished by a practical focus on how federal administrative agencies make decisions, how political institutions influence decisions, and how courts review those decisions. With coverage tailored to 1L or upper-level courses on the regulatory state or legislation and regulation, Bressman, Rubin, and Stack use primary source materials drawn from agency rules, adjudicatory orders, and guidance documents to show how lawyers engage agencies. Additionally, this book uses an accessible central example (auto safety) throughout to make the materials cohesive and accessible, and presents legislation with attention to modern developments in the legislative process. The Regulatory State, Third Edition also presents statutory interpretation in useful terms, highlighting the “tools” that courts employ as well as the theories that judges and scholars have offered. New to the Third Edition: Expanded discussion of agency methods of statutory implementation and regulatory interpretation Additional primary source materials Up-to-date examination of political and judicial control of agency action New chapter with a case study of the regulatory process using the main example from the book Professors and students will benefit from: Tools-based approach that highlights the methods of analysis that agencies, courts, and lawyers utilize Use of an accessible central example as a familiar entry point into a complex legal area Primary source materials—agency documents, including notice-and-comment rules, adjudicatory orders, agency guidance, and more Empirical data, normative or theoretical questions, and practical examples

In Icons and Aliens, John Costonis looks at such pairings and probes why they evoke outrage, why the outraged seek the protection of the legal system to prevent the pairings, and what the law can - and cannot - do in response. Bridging the fields of law and design, Costonis discards conventional rationales for aesthetics policymaking in favor of a compelling account of the psychological forces driving America's support for historic preservation, neighborhood conservation, and environmenralism. Numerous New Yorker cartoons and black-and-white photographs accompany the text, depicting the strength and foibles of legal aesthetics.

This book explores why some members of Congress are more effective than others at navigating the legislative process and what this means for how Congress is organized and what policies it produces. Craig Volden and Alan E. Wiseman develop a new metric of individual legislator effectiveness (the Legislative Effectiveness Score) that will be of interest to scholars, voters, and politicians alike. They use these scores to study party influence in Congress, the successes or failures of women and African Americans in Congress, policy gridlock, and the specific strategies that lawmakers employ to advance their agendas.

Statistically-derived algorithms, adopted by many jurisdictions in an effort to identify the risk of reoffending posed by criminal defendants, have been lambasted as racist, de-humanizing, and antithetical to the foundational tenets of criminal justice. Just Algorithms argues that these attacks are misguided and that, properly regulated, risk assessment tools can be a crucial means of safely and humanely dismantling our massive jail and prison complex. The book explains how risk algorithms work, the types of legal questions they should answer, and the criteria for judging whether they do so in a way that minimizes bias and respects human dignity. It also shows how risk assessment instruments can provide leverage for curtailing draconian prison sentences and the plea-bargaining system that produces them. The ultimate goal of Christopher Slobogin's insightful analysis is to develop the principles that should govern, in both the pretrial and sentencing settings, the criminal justice system's consideration of risk.

In this book, Slobogin and Fondacaro present their vision for a new juvenile justice system, founded on the evidence at hand and promoting the principles of rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The authors develop their juvenile justice policy proposals effectively by carefully addressing the problems with past policy approches and recent theoretical contributions.